SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF

STUDENTS TOWARDS THEIR

INSTITUTES
“THERE ARE TWO PRIMARY CHOICES IN LIFE: TO ACCEPT CONDITIONS AS THEY
EXIST, OR ACCEPT THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CHANGING THEM.”

-DENIS WAITLEY

Social responsibility is referred to as moral authority of an individual towards the society. It is

the duty of every individual to perform so as to maintain a balance between the economy and the
ecosystems. Social responsibility is all about eliminating corruption, irresponsible or unethical
behavior that might create harm to the community, to its people or to the environment as well.

Now, Social responsibility is not just a choice, It’s an obligation of the individuals and the
organizations towards the interest and the welfare of the society.

For individuals, being socially responsible means one should be accountable for the impact of
acts performed by the individuals on the larger world. For organizations, it is the ethical behavior
towards the society and maintaining the sustainability.

Sustainability can be achieved by the organizations by paying careful attention on the activities
and on their impacts on the society and the environment. Organizations can make profit while
taking care of the planet and its people.

Below are some of the examples of socially responsible activities:

 Fair labor practices

 Promoting gender equality and empowering women
 Protecting environmental sustainability
 Improving health conditions
 Rural development projects
 Funding cultural activities and arts
 Awareness and protection of human rights

Above all are some of examples of these activities as the list of socially responsible activities is
just endless. So, in a lay man language Social responsibility can be termed as the behavior or acts
which direct the individuals and the organizations towards the welfare of the society.
Education and a student's social responsibility may vary based on the location, culture,
area of study and type of school. Students should consider several factors while
interacting with people outside a school setting. Social responsibility can also be seen as
considering proper conduct and behavior around classmates to ensure they have a
pleasant learning environment.

Environmental Improvement

Technology and general business should improve the economy and the lives of others
without excessive detriment to the environment. The University of Michigan Business
School teaches MBA students to not deplete natural resources. A lack of concern for the
environment -- such as running a production plant that contributes to air or water
pollution -- will adversely affect the human and animal population. Based on a student's
role and education, the student must be willing to deploy alternative methods to impr ove
society without adversely harming the environment.

Social Tolerance

Students will interact with people from different backgrounds. Social interaction is an
effective method for learning about different types of individuals and gaining
understanding, respect and tolerance for each other. Tolerance for one another's
differences improves society as a whole. Being a student does not necessarily mean you
must agree with people who are different from you, but tolerance and respect are
necessary so students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, faiths or ethnicities can
work toward one goal, collectively.

Community Service

Some schools define an act of social responsibility as performing community service.

For example, the State University of New York Downstate Medical Center suggests
students promote health care by participating in violence-reduction talks in urban
communities and aiding homeless and high school anti-violence programs. SUNY
students also perform public speaking at women's shelters. Community service enriches
a student's experience and practice based on the major she has chosen.

Student Conduct and Behavior

Student handbooks at various schools, such as Smith College, list certain behavior that
constitutes social responsibility. For example, following the honor code by not lying or
cheating on tests and exams is a form of social responsibility; after all, cheating on an
exam can affect other students' grades if a professor grades on a curve. In addition, a
student must be responsible for his actions and ensure those around him are protected.
For example, a student who drinks alcohol excessively may place other students in
danger, especially if she drives a vehicle under the influence.

Striving for social responsibility helps individuals, organizations, and governments have a
positive impact on development and growth of the society as well as the economy.

NEED FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

Social responsibility is an obligation of each and every individual who is a part of this society to
perform their duties for the society. The need of the hour is that each and every individual must
act for the benefits of the society at large.

The need for Social responsibility arises in order to remind individuals of their duty which they
must perform as the member of the society as a whole. Performance of social responsibility is
needed to maintain equilibrium between the economy and the ecosystems. A trade-off may exist
between economic development and the welfare of the society and the environment, although
this analysis also has been challenged by many reports over the past decades.

Social responsibility is essential for the maintenance of equilibrium between the two that is
between the economy and the environment.

Today, the concept of social responsibility is needed both in organizations as well as the in each
and every Individuals life. Businesses can use ethical decision making to secure their businesses
by making potential decisions that allows for government agencies to minimize their
involvement with the corporation.

Even the social responsibility is a need of the hour in educational institutions too. Every student
need to be aware about their social responsibility as a group as well as an individual too.
Students today are considered as the future leaders of our country and thus developing a sense of
Social responsibility in their minds is the need of the hour. And it is the system that can help in
inculcating the sense of responsibility among today's youth. If the required system is not in place
for inspiring the youths, then it could lead to unethical events that would be covering the
headlines of newspapers. These types of unethical events may lead to chaos and thus harming the
society educational groups, also disturbing the harmony of the society.
Individual social responsibility is also needed because being socially responsible is about all
individuals behaving ethically and sensitively towards the common interests of the society and
also towards the social, economic and environmental issues.

Social responsibility is also needed to make Individuals realize their accountability for the
actions they perform and what effect their actions have on the society as a whole and other
individuals related. By taking an active participation in resolving some of the issues, we as
individual member of the society must strive to set all good examples by performing our
obligations with respect to social responsibility.

All people have a degree of social responsibility, and some will willingly take on more social
responsibility than others. When an individual tries to help society, the effort should be
appreciated.

Following are the advantages of being a socially responsible citizen:

 PERSONAL SATISFACTION
One of the biggest advantages of having social responsibility is that it gives a person a
feeling of satisfaction in knowing that he is helping society. The realization that someone, as
just one individual, can make a difference is also something that will encourage him to
continue helping society. It will also give an individual confidence in striving to achieve
more and put forward his own ideas -- rather than only answering to the requests of others.

 GOOD REPUTATION
Helping others will give a person a good reputation in a community. This good reputation
will also make it easier for an individual to use her good name to push forward additional
good work. This individual's opinion will be sought within a community. Once a person has
proved herself to be a socially responsible person, she will be given opportunities to become
more involved in helping the community. Feeling respected will also be a nice feeling in
itself.

The consequences for the individual concerned are not always happy ones. Dilemmas will often
later emerge to determine whether an individual feels inclined to continue to help society.

Following are the disadvantages of social responsibility:

 TAKEN FOR GRANTED

 When people think of putting social responsibility into practice, they will often be
encouraged by others. Problems will arise when an individual, who puts in a lot of time and
effort, becomes taken for granted. Once that individual feels that his efforts are not being
fairly recognized, then the motivation to carry on will sometimes be eroded.

 TOO MUCH RESPONSIBILITY

Sometimes an individual will be so competent at handling social responsibility that she will
be given too much. This will become draining for some individuals, or it will make some
begin to feel that they are more powerful than they actually are. If a person isn't ready for too
much responsibility, then she is also more likely to make mistakes.

RESPONSIBILITIES TOWARDS DIFFERENT SECTIONS

 TOWARDS OWNER
The owners of the business, meaning its shareholders or investors need to be assured at least
a fair return on their capital invested and a reasonable return on investment, which is the
responsibility of the business. To safeguard their capital and provide them with dividends is
necessary to retain them for the survival of the business.

 TOWARDS EMPLOYEES
Employees or the Human Resource is the key factor for the success of any organization. It is
the responsibility of the management of the company to provide them with fair salaries,
wages, increments and other monetary or non-monetary benefits. The management must
make sure that the work environment is suitable and satisfactory. The wage rates should be
fixed in regard to the Minimum wage Act. Fair work standards should be the basis for any
promotions or transfers, Proper training and developments programs should be run.
Employees should be appreciated and compensated for the same. And following the latest
trend, a Grievance Redressal Cell should be established in every organization to provide
employees with a platform to resolve their issues.

 TOWARDS CONSUMERS
In today’s world where consumer is considered the king, their happiness is of prime concern
to any organization. A lot of consumers groups have impact on these organizations to serve
them with the best and according to the pre-defined laws. The role of management here is to
anticipate future development to satisfy their consumers to the fullest. The goods or services
provided should confine to the acceptable standards of quality and should be available at
 reasonable prices. Management should not false lead the consumers by hoarding and black
marketing or using misleading advertisements to gain a consumer base.

 TOWARDS THE GOVERNMENT

It is the primary duty of the business to run its operations in an lawful manner, follow the
taxation scheme, and conform to the economic and social policies of the government. The
management should not be corrupt and neither should encourage such activities.

 TOWARDS THE COMMUNITY

The management should offer jobs to physically challenged section of the society, produce
eco-friendly products, use resources judiciously, set up factories in backward areas, should
work for environmental protection, contribute towards welfare activities, research and
development activities, use alternate methods to production to cut down on resource usage.

FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SOCIAL

RESPONSIBILITY
 MARKET FORCES
Market forces play an essential role in making a businessman responsible to social
obligations. In a cut throat competition, a consumer has a wide choice for choosing the
goods. Those producers who produce quality goods and sell them at cheap rates will find
favorable response from consumers. Those who do not bother about paying capacity,
preferences and the needs of consumers may not find any market for their goods. Market
forces are helpful in making the businessmen aware of their social obligations. Those who do
not bother about paying capacity, preferences and the needs of consumers may not find any
market for their products. Market forces are helpful in making the businessmen aware of
their social obligations.

 GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT
State plays an essential role in making a businessman responsive to society. A number of
legislations are enacted to make it obligatory for the businessman to obey them. Government
fixes and revises wages and other amenities a business should pay to its employees. There are
a number of laws regarding security of workers at work and for controlling pollution from
industrial units. There are regulations for fixing of prices of various products. All such
legislations compel a businessman to work according to the prescribed guidelines.
Besides various regulatory measures if the businessman still tries to exploit employees and
consumers then there is a threat to nationalization. When government feels that a particular
industry is not behaving responsibly and ignores its social obligations then it can nationalize
 the whole industry or may take over a particular unit for this reason. Bank nationalization
was a step in this direction.

 EMERGENCE OF PROFESSIONAL MANAGERS

The system of owner-manager is giving way to professional people. There is a divorce
between ownership and management. The job of management is assigned to professional
manager. These managers themselves being employees have a different approach towards
management. They understand the difficulties faced by employees and try to tackle them in a
compassionate way.

 GROWTH OF TRADE UNIONS

The workers have always been weak in bargaining with management the employees have
been dictating terms on wage rates and working conditions. The development of trade unions
among workers has greatly changed the situation. Their strength has grown with their unity.
Workers can know how to bargain for higher wages and better working conditions.
Managements also try to give more and more benefits to workers for avoiding any conflict.
The development of trade unions has made managements to think about the welfare of their
employees.

 PUBLIC INSPECTION
The working of business houses is open to public inspection these days. People may not be
interested in the working of a small number of proprietary and partnership concerns but they
do feel concerned about the performance of joint stock companies. The final accounts of
every company are filed with the Registrar of Companies every year and anybody paying a
nominal fee can study them. The exposure of business to the public has made it conscious
about its role. Business enterprises try to improve their image in the eyes of the public by
undertaking social welfare measures.

Social Responsibility as a Core Function of the Institution

A significant amount of the literature focuses on the suggestion that social responsibility should be
recognized as an intrinsic characteristic of the university and be imbedded in the functioning of the
institution. The view is often shared that higher education institutions should both promote and
embody a sense of social responsibility. In this sense it is seen as both an internal and external process.
As an extension of this, is believed by some that the university should maintain a reputation with
outsiders for being responsible. Francois Vallaeys is a philosopher specializing in university social
responsibility and adviser to the Regional Observatory on Social Responsibility in Latin America and the
Caribbean (ORSALC-UNESCO). He is one of the founders of the University Social 13 Responsibility (USR)
movement in Latin America. In his 2007 article Responsabilidad Social Universitaria: Propuesta para una
definicion madura e eficiente (University Social Responsibility: Proposal for a Mature and Efficient
Definition), he discusses definitions of social responsibility in higher education and points out that in a
university setting social responsibility cannot merely be understood as philanthropy but rather an
orientation integrated into the mandate and programming of the university. In his view, social
responsibility should not be considered separate from the normal functioning of the university and must
not be confused with individual acts of generosity that mask underlying problems within the
organization. It should rather be understood as an inherent characteristic of the organization that
suggests a different mode of administering organizations at once internally and in its relationship with
the exterior (Vallaeys, 2007, p. 3-4). In other words, social responsibility is at once internal and external
and is integrated into the functioning of the institution. Dr. James C. Votruba is President Emeritus and
Professor of Educational Leadership at Northern Kentucky University. In his article “Strengthening the
University’s Alignment with Society: Challenges and Strategies” he emphasizes the need for universities
to adapt to a changing marketplace and to shift the institutional focus toward engagement so that it is
more integrated into the general mandate of the organization (Votruba, 1996). From this perspective,
the integration of social responsibility into the mandate of the organization is tied to the specific
external focus of engagement. Other authors suggest a more comprehensive orientation of the core
mandate of the organization. 14 Piyushi Kotecha, the Chief Executive of the Southern African Regional
Universities Association, (SARUA) demonstrates at the 2010 Bellagio Conference of the Talloires
Network how this principle is formally presented in the social responsibility report of a university
identified as UCT. Kotecha explains that according to the report, “Embedding social responsiveness in
the core activities of the university also positions the university as a player in addressing the challenges
of society. As our society and the world changes, universities especially are required to respond to
different challenges that arise, to ease the plight of the poor, to develop innovative solutions to many
and varied problems, to offer informed guidance to those that our democracy has given responsibilities
for leadership and service delivery, and to ensure that we engage with partners for purposes of social
advancement” (Kotecha, 2010). In this quote, integrating social responsibility, or social responsiveness
into core activities is seen as the means by which an institution can better address the myriad problems
and challenges facing society. The view has also been expressed that not only should the core mandate
of the higher education institution include an orientation towards social responsibility, but that this
should also be recognized by outsiders. Sir David Watson is professor of higher education and principal
of Green Templeton College, University of Oxford (Watson’s book The Question of Conscience: Higher
Education and Personal Responsibility was recently published by the Institute of Education Press). In
Watson (2003)’s view, the successful 21st century university “has to earn and sustain a positive
reputation, locally, nationally and internationally” and “the successful 21st century university has to be,
and be seen to be, ethically and environmentally responsible”. Watson (2003) believes that an HEI
should understand itself and play a role in improving “the domains in which it works, like 15 education,
the environment or health.” The higher education institution must then not only promote and embody
social responsibility, but it must also wear it. There is therefore a degree of consensus regarding the idea
that higher education institutions must have principles of social responsibility embedded in the
functioning of the institution and that it should form part of the institution’s identity. It must also be
clear to outsiders that the university is socially responsible. Part of appearing to be socially responsible is
being able to show that it is conscious of its role in society. The specificities regarding the HEI’s role in
society is another area where social responsibility is addressed.

The Role of the Higher Education Institution in Society

The role that the higher education institution plays in society is an area where there is significant
discussion. For example, while authors emphasize the importance of quality teaching and research,
many focus on the orientation of that research and the importance of ensuring that it teaches ethics and
promotes human rights and environmental sustainability. Many also contribute to a discussion regarding
the higher education institution’s contribution to development and its capacity to produce graduates
with an awareness of history and an ability to generate knowledge regarding solutions to today’s
problems. While some authors focus primarily on the important role that the higher education
institution plays in both social and economic development, others suggest that the higher education
institution must also play a role in complementary issues such as democracy, culture and research. 16
According to Tandon (n.d.), “the research and teaching functions of HEIs should serve the larger mission
of human and social development” (Tandon, n.d.). Also concerned with issues related to development,
Kotecha (2010) highlights in her presentation to the Bellagio Conference “the need for a wider debate
around the role of public universities in promoting the public good and in helping to address
development challenges facing our society.” (Kotecha, 2010). She also provides some examples of the
different roles that the higher education institution can play in terms of civic engagement in her
presentation wherein she explains “civic engagement occurs through research, engagement with policy
development, public commentary on development issues and strategies, disseminating knowledge and
ideas derived from research, promoting active citizenship among the student population, empowering
external constituencies, improving the relevance of the curriculum, and providing opportunities for
lifelong learning” (Kotecha, 2010). Saleem Badat is the Vice-Chancellor of South Africa’s Rhodes
University. According to Badat (2009), higher education must play 5 key roles: cultivation of highly
educated people; democracy and democratic citizenship; development needs and challenges;
engagement with the intellectual and cultural life of societies; and research and scholarship. Both
Kotecha and Badat share the view of many scholars in the field that the higher education institution
plays an important role in development. It is also evident that the discussion also centres around other
key roles such as democracy and democratic citizenship. This discussion also often looks specifically at
the impact that higher education is having on students and how students are being prepared to
contribute to society in a socially 17 responsible way. Watson (2003), emphasizes the importance of
quality of the teaching and explains that “The successful 21st century university: It has to devise an
excellent portfolio of courses, and teach them well” and “has to contribute at the highest level in at
least some aspects of research”. In his article entitled Does Higher Education Make You Think? Watson
lists some of the ways in which the role of higher education and its impact on students is understood. He
explains that “Looking at the long sweep of university history, it is possible to extract several distinct
claims about what higher education does to and for students: in existential terms (how students come
to be); in epistemological terms (how they think and appraise information); in behavioural terms (how
they learn to conduct themselves); and in positional terms (both through competition and
collaboration)” (Watson, 2013). He explains that the application of these claims varies depending on
factors such as the institutional setting, the subject and mode of study or the expectations of funders
and stakeholders (Watson, 2013). He explains that “Most of the claims about the purposes and
achievements of higher education relate to the individual: it will change your life, through conversion or
confirmation of faith, by improving your character, by giving you marketable abilities, by making you a
better member of the community, or simply by being capable of operating more effectively in the
contemporary world” (Watson, 2013). Badat (2009) provides detailed recommendations on the focus of
teaching. In his view, universities should not only focus on preparing students to enter the labour force
and to contribute to the economy and economic development but should also support their
development of skills that have social value. From his perspective, higher education teaches students
what it means to be human and raises their awareness of our cultural, scientific, intellectual inheritance
and our historical and contemporary understandings (Badat, 2009, 18 p.8). He believes that education
should teach students to see the world from other people’s perspectives (Badat, 2009, p. 9). It is
proposed that the higher education institution must provide quality teaching that prepares students not
only to contribute to economic pursuits but to also develop an awareness of social issues and be able to
contribute social as well as economic value. The idea is presented in the literature that the higher
education institution has the capacity not only to teach students about global issues and problems but
to also learn and generate new knowledge through this teaching, learning and research. Through this
teaching and learning, the higher education institution contributes to the resolution of these global
problems. Badat (2009) explains that “Through teaching and learning, universities can develop a
consciousness of myriad economic, educational, health, environmental and other problems, and
through research they can confront and help contribute to their management and resolution.” (Badat,
2009, p. 10). Tandon (n.d) also shares the view that HEIs should be generating new knowledge to resolve
pressing issues. He explains that “societal development issues (such as multiculturalism, sustainability
and so on) have become so complex that new knowledge is needed in order to address them. HEIs are
expected to generate this knowledge”(Tandon, n.d). In Badat’s (2009) view, programs must teach
students to function in the rapidly changing society we live in today. They must be prepared to not only
receive knowledge but also to create it and should emerge from a university experience with a sense of
democratic principles, ethics and a sensitivity to human rights issues. Badat (2009) believes that the first
purpose of HEIs is the production of knowledge “which advances understanding of the 19 natural and
social worlds, and enriches humanity’s accumulated scientific and cultural inheritances and heritage”
(Badat, 2009, p. 5). The second purpose is the “dissemination of knowledge and the formation and
cultivation of the cognitive character of students” (Badat, 2009, p. 5). In this view, students are viewed
as agents of change and through the higher education experience they learn and gain new information,
but they also develop the ability to generate new knowledge and contribute constructively to the
discussion and ultimately the resolution of the problems that they are studying. In the literature, there is
some exploration of the basis for determining the role of the higher education institution in society.
Vallaeys (2007) bases his assessment of the role of higher education institutions on the impact the HEI
has on society. In order to better understand the role that the HEI can play in society, Vallaeys (2007)
looks first at the impacts that the university has on society and groups them under four key areas:
impacts of organizational functioning (on staff, students and the environment), educational impact,
cognitive and epistemological impact, and social impact. Based on these impacts, four activities are
identified that make a university socially responsible: Responsible campus (ethical and democratic
internal processes and respect for the environment), responsible education (curriculum supports and
promotes the sustainable development of society), the socially responsible management of knowledge
(participatory approaches to research involving human subjects, broad dissemination of findings),
community based participatory research and communities of mutual learning for development
(Vallaeys, 2007). By identifying how the higher education institution impacts organizational functioning,
education, cognitive development and social behaviour, Vallaeys (2007) is able 20 to specify what role
higher education institutions play in embedding principles of social responsibility into each type of
impact. A number of authors share the view that higher education institutions should provide quality
teaching and courses to students and should ensure that these courses contribute to increased cultural
understanding and awareness of social and environmental issues. There is significant exploration of the
role of higher education institutions in social and economic development as well as other areas critical
to the resolution of social and environmental issues such as democratic citizenship. Authors approach
the determination of roles in varied ways, in some cases linking to role of the institution to the impact it
has on society. In order to carry out these roles it is often proposed that a critical factor is the manner in
which the higher education institution engages with communities and society.
 Literature review
The promotion of socially responsible behavior in the form of moral character, compliance to
social rules and norms, cooperation, and positive styles of social interaction has been a
traditional and valued educational objective for institutes. Indeed, an implicit goal of educational
institutions has always been to socialize children into adult society by teaching work- and
responsibility-oriented values such as dependability, punctuality, and obedience in conjunction
with the learning process (Dreeben, 1968; Jackson, 1968). More importantly, character
development and social responsibility in general have been stated as clear objectives for
institutes in almost every educational policy statement since 1848, being promoted with the same
frequency as the development of academic skills. Indicators of students’ achievement motivation
have been associated with their sense of school belonging (Goodenow, 1993) and with their
backing of social responsibility goals (Hicks, Murphy, & Patrick, 1995; Patrick, Hicks, & Ryan,
1997). Wentzel (1991b) defined social responsibility as ‘‘adherence to social rules and role
expectations’’ (p. 2) and has suggested that students’ pursuit of responsibility goals represents
their desire and perceived ability to meet the formal social demands of the classroom context
(Wentzel, 1991a). Students who report high levels of pursuing responsibility goals have been
shown to receive higher grades in school (Wentzel, 1989, 1993), although the mechanisms core
this association remain unclear.

One possible explanation is that responsibility goals are associated with adaptive patterns of
achievement motivation. For example, Patrick et al. (1997) reported that students who endorse
responsibility goals have higher professed self-efficacy for academic work than do their peers.
The development of socially responsible classroom behavior can be skilled in several ways.
First, interventions that teach specific self-monitoring and self-control strategies can be aimed at
individual students who display reckless or inappropriate behavior. Second, various classroom
management practices can be used to establish group order and control. Of particular
significance for the present review are findings indicating that teachers dynamically teach social
norms and expectations for classroom behavior to their students. In addition to being a valued
outcome of the education process in its own right, behaving in responsible ways may also be a
critical student characteristic that directly contributes to learning and performance. Evidence of a
positive relationship between social responsibility and academic performance comes from
several types of research.

The relation between peer influences and achievement is also somewhat ambiguous.
Traditionally, interactions with peers have been viewed as having a potentially negative impact
on the achievement of educational goals. Group work is often seen as adversative to individual
achievement, and peer norms are generally believed to be hostile to those of the institutes. On the
other hand, peer acceptance among school-aged children is based in large part on social
responsibility as indexed by cooperative, prosocial, and nonaggressive types of behavior (Coie,
Dodge, & Coppotelli, 1982; Dodge, 1983). . A second way in which social responsibility can
influence school performance is by way of motivational orientations to achieve academically.

Most relevant to social responsibility in the classroom are systems of rules and norms that define
the student role. Indeed, students are required to stick to rules and norms for interpersonal
conduct as well as those that directly promote academic learning and performance. For instance,
a variety of rules reflecting cooperation, respect for others, and positive forms of group
participation govern social interaction in the classroom. In addition, students are expected to
work hard, pay attention, participate in classroom activities, do their assignments, and study their
lessons. Although not all of these activities are social in nature, they reflect rules of social
conduct designed to guide the learning process.

This provides little indication of how business students might compare to managers in their
responses to questions about the relative importance of business ethics and social responsibility
in determining overall educational effectiveness. Today's business students are members of a
generation which has been labeled in the popular press as self-centered, apathetic and
materialistic. If these students respond as stereotyped, then they might be expected to attach less
significance to the business ethics and social responsibility issues than managers. While
managers may act in their own self-interest in achieving career successes which are often tied to
corporate financial performance, managers may also need to balance the interests of various
constituencies. As a consequence, managers might be expected to rate ethics and social
responsibility issues higher than students.

Clearly, all writers agree that students have a social responsibility beyond studying (Fried- man
and Friedman, 1981). However, while the de- sired degree of involvement is of significant
debate, the vast majority of writers argue for some degree of business involvement in ethical
practices and socially responsive actions on some issues (Frederick et aI.)

A study by Quinn and Rohrbaugh (1983) concluded that there are 17 core organizational
effectiveness criteria that fit into a two dimensional "competing values" space - but they
neglected to identify either ethics or social responsibility as among these core criteria,
contrastingly. It was found that corporate social responsibility is a multidimensional construct
associated with organizational effectiveness. Recently, Kraft (1990, 1991) also looked at the
relative importance of social responsibility as compared to other organizational effectiveness
criteria.

The level of corporate commitment to ethics and social responsibility is complex and depends on
a variety of factors (e.g. Robin and Reidenbach, 1987; Abratt and Sacks, 1988). For example,
Kraft and Hage (1989) concluded that, while size and profitability are dominant characteristics,
corporate goals, strategies, and structure may all be related to corporate social responsibility.

Ethics and social responsibility can, can should, also be analysed on an individual level. For
instance, according to the various theories of marketing ethics (e.g., Ferrell and Gresham 1985;
Hunt and Vitell, 1986, 1993; and Ferrell et at.,1989), a marketer's decision-making processes in
situations having ethical content is a function of different categories of background factors such
as cultural environment, industry environment, organizational environment, professional
environment and personal characteristics. Hunt and Vitell's (1986) model depicts a marketer's
ethical judgments as including a teleological evaluation – the process where the marketer
evaluates an evoked set of alternatives based upon factors such as the probability and desirability
of perceived consequences.

The perceived importance of ethics and social responsibility for organizational effectiveness by
an individual is likely to be a critical determinant of whether or not an ethical problem is even
perceived in a given situation as well as a determinant of variables such as deontological norms
and importance of stakeholders, among others. Thus, this scale could potentially be useful in
terms of our understanding of the decision processes in ethical situations.

Managers tend to think and talk about organizational effectiveness in terms of goal achievement
for their organization. Different priorities are attached to different goals. Yet, it is often critically
important for managers to defend these priorities to different "audiences" (Connolly et al., 1980;
Freeman, 1984; Zammuto, 1984).

Various management literatures have contributed to the conceptualization of organizational

effectiveness, but each tends to emphasize somewhat different stakeholders and performance
criteria (e.g., Cameron and Whetton, 1983; Glueck and Jauch, 1984). The business ethics/social
responsibility literature tends to take the broadest of these various perspectives, focusing on
benefits to society and on non-quantitative measures (Frederick et al., 1988; Luthans et al.,
1984). However, there have been numerous studies investigating the relationship between social
responsibility and profitability, albeit with conflicting results (Aupperle et al., 1985).
Nonetheless, Tuleja (1985) argues that corporate motives are complex and that ethics/social
responsibility and profitability can be compatible.
A complex issue and will depend on a variety of situational factors such as economic
circumstances, Some concluded that, while size and profitability are dominant characteristics,
corporate goals, strategies, and structure may all be related to corporate social responsibility.
What seems most clear is that ethics/ social responsibility is a complex construct that1988;
Luthans et al., 1984). The literature has not gone without suggesting ways to increase business
student awareness of these corporate ethics and social responsibility issues.

In making these changes, it is important for business educators to ascertain the beginning and
desired levels of student understanding. This is necessary both to assess progress toward desired
levels as well as to determine how to achieve the clear educational goals, which Skinner (1984)
emphasized are essential. Data for establishing such goals might be provided, in part, by
practicing managers. Some progress has been made in this regard as well as in assessing student
attitudes toward corporate ethics and social responsibility. Yet, little is known about perceptions
of the relative importance of ethics and social responsibility in organizational decisions.

Corporate philanthropy provides a mechanism whereby businesses and organizations can

contribute to and help the communities which have made them successful, and can also provide a
powerful mechanism for fostering social change” (Kurtzman, 2004). The CSR concept has been
around since the early 1970s, yet it only entered mainstream business about a decade ago (Deri,
2010). Strategically CSR can become a source of tremendous social progress, as the business
applies its considerable resources, expertise and insight to the activities that benefit society
(Porter and Kramer, 2006).

Educational effectiveness is the central goal for most practicing managers (Posner and Schmidt,
1984), yet it is a concept which has plagued man- agers for some time. Managers tend to think
and talk about educational effectiveness in terms of goal achievement for their organization.
Different priorities are attached to different goals. Yet, it is often critically important for
managers to defend these priorities to different "audiences.

Development of social responsibility, the institute should continue to promote the development
of students ' responsibilities. Students have learned from actual practice in educational
institutions, family and the community. School must supply the media environment around
teaching and support activities contributing to strengthen the livelihood. Activities that are
contributing to the development of corporate social responsibility can be done in several ways,
such as providing training, knowledge and use of fictional roles. Counseling, group activities and
scenarios used in connection.

Due to the importance of corporate social responsibility. So researchers are interested in doing
research synthesis regarding social responsibility. To find out the conclusion that knowledge
from the research. Can apply knowledge to beneficial knowledge research on social
responsibility
Most practicing managers (Posner and Schmidt, 1984), yet it is a concept which has plagued
managers for some time. Managers tend to think and talk about organizational effectiveness in
terms of goal achievement for their organization. Different priorities are attached to different
goals. Yet, it is often critically important for managers to defend these priorities to different
"audiences" (Connolly et al., 1980; Freeman, 1984; Zammuto, 1984).
Various management literatures have contributed to the conceptualization of organizational
effectiveness, but each tends to emphasize somewhat different stakeholders and performance
criteria (e.g., Cameron and Whetton, 1983; Glueck and Jauch, 1984). The business ethics/social
responsibility literature tends to take the broadest of these various perspectives, focusing on
benefits to society and on non-quantitative measures (Frederick et al., 1988; Luthans et al.,
1984). However, there have been numerous studies investigating the relationship between social
responsibility and profitability, albeit with conflicting results (Aupperle et al., 1985).
Nonetheless, Tuleja (1985) argues that corporate motives are complex and that ethics/social
responsibility and profitability can be compatible.
Other writers have concluded that the level of commitment to corporate social responsibility is
also
A complex issue and will depend on a variety of situational factors such as economic
circumstances
(e.g., Abratt and Sacks, 1988). Kraft and Hage (1989) concluded that, while size and profitability
are dominant characteristics, corporate goals, strategies, and structure may all be related to
corporate social responsibility. What seems most clear is that ethics/ social responsibility is a
complex construct that1988; Luthans et al., 1984). The literature has not gone without suggesting
ways to increase business student awareness of these corporate ethics and social responsibility
issues. For example, a series of articles appearing in the Journal of Business Ethics recommends
going beyond the introduction of courses in corporate social responsibility and business ethics,
encouraging changes in curriculum content and teaching methods (e.g., Gandz and Hayes, 1988;
George, 1987, 1988; Mai-Dalton, 1987; Stead and Miller, 1988).
In making these changes, it is important for business educators to ascertain the beginning and
desired levels of student understanding (e.g., student comprehension of business ethics and social
responsibility issues). This is necessary both to assess progress toward desired levels as well as
to determine how to achieve the clear educational goals, which Skinner (1984) emphasized are
essential. Data for establishing such goals might be provided, in part, by practicing managers.
Some progress has been made in this regard (Ford and McLaughlin, 1984; Goodman and
Crawford, 1974; Hollon and Ulrich, 1979; Holmes, 1976; Kraft, 1991b; Stevens, 1984b), as well
as in assessing student attitudes toward corporate ethics and social responsibility (e.g., Arlow and
Ulrich, 1980; Grant and Broom, 1988; Hollon and Ulrich, 1979; Kraft, 1991 a; Pressley and
Blevins, 1984; Stevens, 1984a&b; Zikmund et aI., 1980). Yet, little is known about perceptions
of the relative importance of ethics and social responsibility in organizational decisions.
To link social responsibility and organizational effectiveness. A study by Quinn and Rohrbaugh
(1983) concluded that there are 17 core organizational effectiveness criteria that fit into a two
dimensional "competing values" space - but they neglected to identify either ethics or social
responsibility as among these core criteria, contrastingly, Zahra and LaTour (1987) found that
corporate social responsibility is a multidimensional construct associated with organizational
effectiveness. Recently, Kraft (1990, 1991) also looked at the relative importance of social
responsibility as compared to other organizational effectiveness criteria.
The level of corporate commitment to ethics and social responsibility is complex and depends on
a variety of factors (e.g. Robin and Reidenbach, 1987; Abratt and Sacks, 1988). For example,
Kraft and Hage (1989) concluded that, while size and profitability are dominant characteristics,
corporate goals, strategies, and structure may all be related to corporate social responsibility.
Ethics and social responsibility can, can should, also be analysed on an individual level. For
instance, according to the various theories of marketing ethics (e.g., Ferrell and Gresham 1985;
Hunt and Vitell, 1986, 1993; and Ferrell et at.,1989), a marketer's decision-making processes in
situations having ethical content is a function of different categories of background factors such
as cultural environment, industry environment, organizational environment, professional
environment and personal characteristics. Hunt and Vitell's (1986) model depicts a marketer's
ethical judgments as including a teleological evaluation – the process where the marketer
evaluates an evoked set of alternatives based upon factors such as the probability and desirability
of perceived consequences. In addition, they specify "importance
Of stakeholders," the relative importance of various stakeholder groups to the individual
marketer, as a key determinant of teleological evaluations. The Hunt and Vitell model also
depicts ethical judgments as including a deontological evaluation - a process where one
determines what is ethical by applying a set of norms to possible alternatives.

The perceived importance of ethics and social responsibility for organizational effectiveness by
an individual is likely to be a critical determinant of whether or not an ethical problem is even
perceived in a given situation as well as a determinant of variables such as deontological norms
and importance of stakeholders, among others. Thus, this scale could potentially be useful in
terms of our understanding of the decision processes in ethical situations

A key policy priority in India related to higher education and social responsibility is access to
higher education. The Right to Education Act is legislation put in place to serve the goal of
increasing access to India’s marginalized citizens. Although the current policy environment
appears to more directly address the pressing issue of access, according to media reports the
Human Resources Minister M M Pallam Raju recently indicated that “higher education must
pay more attention to helping students understand how to lead ethical and fulfilling lives”
(Times of India, 2013).

In Latin America the concept of Social Responsibility is examined from a functional 41 perspective,
usually within the broader discussion surrounding University Social Responsibility (USR) led by thought
leaders such as Francois Vallaeys. The concept is often broken down into its component parts and
analyzed for the various purposes it serves in terms of either promoting ethics, contributing to economic
and social development, increasing human capital or putting in place structural programs and
administrative measures to meet the social and environmental demands of students and society in
general. The unique approach in Latin America and the prevalence of the USR concept appears to be
rooted in a philosophical discussion regarding ethics among academic institutions and the influence of
the Catholic Church on Iberamerican public life. According to Soriano (2011), in the past decade there
have been significant developments leading to pioneering works which have clarified and defined the
concept of university social responsibility or USR. Projects such as Proyecto Universal: Construye Pais
(Universal Project: Construct the Country) of 2002 which was created by a group of Chilean universities,
projects carried out by the Asociacion de Universidades confiadas a la Compania de Jesus en America
Latina (Association of Universities trusting in the company of Jesus in Latin America), grouped together
in AUSJAL, and the development of the international online course “Como ensenar etica, capital social y
desarollo en la universidad” (How to teach ethics, social capital and development in the university)
prepared by Francois Vallaeys and promoted by the educational portal of the OEA since 2004. Also
included is the work of the Interamerican development bank with its program Red Universitaria de Etica
y Desarollo Social (University Network for Ethics and Social Development). The work of the Red
Iberoamericana de Universidades por la RSE (Iberamerican University Network of the RSE) also
contributed to 42 developments as the focal point of the Centro Nacional de Responsabilidad Social
Empresarial y Capital Social (FCE-UBA) (National centre for social responsibility, entrepreneurship and
social capital), in September of 2006. (Soriano, 2011, p. 4).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1. Research Objective:
 To acquire a thorough knowledge on the subject of social responsibility
among students towards their institutes in Delhi.
 To measure how socially responsible the students are.
 To understand the mindset of the students towards their institutes and their
faculties.

2. Type of Research:
A Research Methodology defines the purpose of the research, how it proceeds,
how to measure the effects and what constitute success with respect to the
 objectives determined for carrying out the research study. The appropriate
research design formulated is detailed below.

Exploratory research: The objective of exploratory research is to gather

preliminary information that will help define problems and suggest hypothesis.

This kind of research has the primary objective of development of insights into
the problem. It studies the main area where the problem lies and also tries to
evaluate some appropriate courses of action. The research methodology for the
present study has been adopted to reflect these realties and help reach the
logical conclusion in an objective and scientific manner. The present study
contemplated an exploratory research.

3. Data Collection Method

Primary Data: “Primary data is the data which is collected by the research at
first hand.” Primary data is basically fresh data collected directly from the target
respondents; it could be collected through Questionnaire Surveys, Interviews,
Focus Group Discussions Etc.

Secondary Data: “Secondary data whether internal or external is the data

already collected by others for propose other than solution of the problem at
hand.” Secondary data that is already available and published which originates
from the specific field or area where research is carried out e.g. publish
broachers, official reports etc.

We have used primary data and secondary data for this project. I collected
primary data with the help of the Questionnaire and for secondary data I
referred some books, websites and the previous research papers.

4. Sampling Procedure:
Primary data: Primary data was selected from the sample by a self-
administrated questionnaire.

Sample size : 154

Sample area : Delhi

 Sample Unit : Post graduate Students

Secondary Data: Secondary data was collected through Articles, Reports,

Journals, Magazines, Newspapers and Internet.

5. Analytical Tools:
Simple statistical tools have been used in the present study to analyze and
interpret the data collected from the field with help of SPSS. The study has
used percentiles method and the data are presented in the form of tables and
diagrams.
 ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION

In order to understand the social responsibility of students towards their institutes a factor
analysis is done using SPSS.

One aspect in Factor Analysis that needs mention in detail includes KMO & Bartlett’s Test of
Sphericity. It is a measure of sampling adequacy that is recommended to check the case to
variable ratio for the analysis being conducted.

KMO and Bartlett's Testa

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling .836
Adequacy.
959.17
Approx. Chi-Square
Bartlett's Test of 4
Sphericity df 190
Sig. .000
a. Based on correlations

In our research the KMO index is 0.836 which indicates that sampling is adequate. Also the
Bartlett’s test of sphericity index is .000 indicates that validity and suitability of the responses
collected to the problem being addressed through the study.

Data collected for Questionnaire has been analysed through Factor analysis where the
performance of bank is depicted on various parameters on a scale of 1 to 5.

Factor name Eigen value %of variance Item converged Factor loading
explained
Compliant 5.811 26.550 Attend college 5.310
regularly
Help keep
classroom neat
and clean
Promptly make
up for work
missed during
absent
Complete
assignments on
time
Follow class
routine willingly
 Respect other
student’s
belongings
Self Restraint 1.652 5.544 Avoids 1.109
disturbing others
Encourage other
students to be
quiet
Encourage other
students to attend
college regularly
Disciplined 1.494 4.979 Obey institute .996
rules
Respect the faculty
Cooperate with the
faculty
Responsible 1.433 4.742 Switch off the .948
electric
equipment while
leaving the
classroom
Promptly return
borrowed items
such as faculty’s
reference books
Help other
students in
understanding
information
Helpful 1.155 2.985 cooperate with .597
the other students
help your faculty
solve serious
problems
use cell phone
during lectures
Nuisance 1.068 2.179 Listen to others .436
when they talk
Behave when
visitors are
present
 Factor 1: Compliant: This factor explains 25.550% of the total variance. It includes the
variables such as attending college regularly, keeping class neat & clean with factor loading
of 5.310.

Factor 2: Self Restraint: This factor shows 5.544% of the total variance. It includes the
variables i.e., avoiding disturbing others, encouraging other students to be quiet etc with a
factor loading of 1.109.

Factor 3: Disciplined: This factor shows 4.979% of total variance. It includes the variables
such as obeying institute rules, respecting the faculty with factor loading of .996.

Factor 4: Responsible: This factor shows 4.742% of total variance .it includes variables
such as helping other students in understanding information, promptly returning borrowed
things etc with factor loading of .948.

Factor 5: Helpful: This factor shows 2.985% of total variance. it includes variables such as
cooperating with other students, helping faculty with serious problems etc with factor loading
of .597.

Factor 6: Nuisance: This factor shows 2.179% of total variance .it includes variables such as
listening to others when they talk, behaving well when visitors are present etc with factor
loading of .436.

Reliability Test

Cronbach’s alpha, α (or coefficient alpha), developed by Lee Cronbach in 1951, measures
reliability, or internal consistency. “Reliability” is how well a test measures what it should.

It is most commonly used when the questionnaire is developed using multiple likert scale
statements and therefore to determine if the scale is reliable or not.

A high level for alpha may mean that the items in the test are highly correlated. However, α is
also sensitive to the number of items in a test. A larger number of items can result in a larger α,
and a smaller number of items in a smaller α. If alpha is high, this may mean redundant questions
(i.e. they’re asking the same thing).

A low value for alpha may mean that there aren’t enough questions on the test. Adding
more relevant items to the test can increase alpha. Poor interrelatedness between test questions
can also cause low values, so can measuring more than one latent variable.

Cronbach’s alpha tests to see if multiple-question Likert scale surveys are reliable. These
questions measure latent variables — hidden or unobservable variables like: a person’s
conscientiousness, neurosis or openness. These are very difficult to measure in real life.
Cronbach’s alpha will tell you if the test you have designed is accurately measuring the variable
of interest.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's N of
Alpha Items
.825 20

The cronbach alpha in this research is .825 which reflects high reliability of the measuring
instrument. Furthermore, it indicates high level of internal consistency with respect to the
specific sample.

Face vailidity

Face validity, also called logical validity, is a simple form of validity where you apply a
superficial and subjective assessment of whether or not your study or test measures what it is
supposed to measure. You can think of it as being similar to “face value”, where you just skim
the surface in order to form an opinion. It is the easiest form of validity to apply to research.
However, it doesn’t general include much (if any at all) in the way of objective measurements.
Therefore, it is often criticized as the weakest form of validity.

It is built upon the principle of reading through the plans and assessing the viability of
the research, with little objective measurement.

Some people use the term face validity to refer only to the validity of a test to observers who are
not expert in testing methodologies. For instance, if a test is designed to measure whether
children are good spellers, and parents are asked whether the test is a good test, this measures the
face validity of the test. If an expert is asked instead, some people would argue that this does not
measure face validity. This distinction seems too careful for most applications Generally, face
validi.ty means that the test "looks like" it will work, as opposed to "has been shown to work"..
A Scree Plot is a simple line segment plot that shows the fraction of total variance in the data.It is
a plot, in descending order of magnitude, of the eigenvalues of a correlation matrix. In the
context of factor analysis or principal components analysis, a scree plot helps the analyst
visualize the relative importance of the factors, a sharp drop in the plot signals that subsequent
factors are ignorable.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Altbach, Philip (1985). Higher Education in International Perspective: a survey and bibliography.
London and New York: Mansell Publishing Limited. Altbach, Philip (2004) “Globalization and the
University, Myths and Realities in an Unequal World” Tertiary Education and Management 10 (no. 1,
2004), pp. 3-25. Astin, A. and Astin. H (2000). Leadership Reconsidered: Engaging Higher Education
in Social Change. BattleCreek: W.K. Kellog Foundation. Astin, A.W. and Sax, L. J. (1998). “How
Undergraduates are Affected by Service Participation” In Journal of College Student Development.
39(3), pp. 251-263. Badat, Saleem. (2008) “On the ‘visibility’ of our Universities: Universities need a
bigger role in public life. In Cape Times. Rhodes University. Badat, Saleem. (2009) The role of higher
education in society: valuing higher education. In: HERS-SA Academy 2009, 13-19 Sept 2009,
University of Cape Town, Graduate School of Business, Cape Town, South Africa. Banque Mondiale
(2003). Construire les Societes du Savoir: Nouveaux defies pour l’enseignement superieur. Presses
Uninversite Laval. Barnett, Ron (1997) Higher Education: A Critical Business. Bristol, PA: Open
University Press. Barnett, Ron (2013) “The Coming of the Ecological University”. Oxford Review of
Education 37 (4), 439-455. Video provided by the Institute of Education, University of London.
Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlICR1Vhi_E Beere, C. A.; Votruba, J.C.; Wells,
G.W. & Shulman, L.S., 2011. Becoming an Engaged Campus: A Practical Guide for Institutionalizing
Public Engagement, Jossey-Bass Publishers. Benneworth, P. S., Conway, C., Charles, D., Humphrey, L.
& Younger, P., 2009. Characterising Modes of University Engagement with wider society: A
Literature Review and Survey of Best Practice. Newcastle: Newcastle University Office of the Pro-
Vice Chancellor. Benneworth, P. & Jongbloed, B.W., 2010. Who Matters to Universities? A
Stakeholder Perspective on Humanities, Arts and Social Science Valorisation. Higher Education, (59),
pp. 567–588. Berube, M., R., and Berube, C., T., (2010). The Moral University. Rowman and
Littlefield. 51 Bloom, D., Canning, D., Chan, K. (2006). Higher Education and Economic Development
in Africa. Harvard University. Bjarnason, S. & Coldstream, P., (Eds), 2003. The Idea of Engagement:
Universities in societies., London: Association of Commonwealth Universities. Bollag, Burton (2003).
“Amelioration de l’Enseignment superieur en Afrique subsaharienne: Ce qui marche!” Rapport d’une
conference regionale de formation tenue a Accra, Ghana. Boland, J., (2006). “Pedagogies for Civic
Engagement in Irish Higher Education: Principles and Practices in Context”. In Democracy,
Citizenship and Higher Education: Dialogue between Universities and Community. Vytautas Magnus
University. Kaunas, Lithuania. Brennan, J.; Arthur, L.; Little, B.; Cochrane, A.; Williams, R.; Locke, W.;
Singh, M.; David, M.; Kim, T. & King, R., 2010. Higher Education and Society: A research report,
London: CHERI. Brock-Utne, Birgit (2003). “Formulating Higher Education Policies in Africa: The
Pressure from External Sources and the NeoLiberal Agenda” In JHEA/RESA, 1(1). Boston College &
Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa 2003. Retrieved from:
https://www.codesria.org/IMG/pdf/2-_Brock-Utne.pdf Brown, Ed. (2009). “Corporate Social
Responsibility in Higher Education”. In ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies.
8(3), 474-483. Burns, D. & Squires, H., with Programme Participants, 2011. Embedding Public
Engagement in Higher Education: Final Report of the National Research Programme. Bristol: NCCPE.
Chilvers, J., 2010. Sustainable Participation? Mapping Out and Reflecting on the Field of Public
Dialogue on Science and Technology, Harwell. Chilvers, J., (ed), 2009. Critical Studies of Public
Engagement in Science and the Environment: Workshop Report. Cuthill, M., 2010. Working
Together: A Methodological Case Study of “Engaged Scholarship.” Gateways: International Journal
of Community Research and Engagement, 3, pp.20–37. Delanty, G., 2001. Challenging Knowledge:
The University in the Knowledge Society, Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher
Education & Open University Press. 52 Dempsey, S.E., 2010. Critiquing Community Engagement.
Management Communication Quarterly, 24(3), pp.359–390. Dresser, M., 2010. Politics, Populism,
and Professionalism: Reflections on the Role of the Academic Historian in the Production of Public
History. The Public Historian, 32(3), pp.39– 63. Durose, C., Beebeejaun, Y., Rees, J., Richardson, J. &
Richardson, L., 2011. Towards CoProduction in Research with Communities. AHRC Connected
Communities Review. Davies, S.R., 2011. The Rules of Engagement: Power and Interaction in
Dialogue Events. Public Understanding of Science, pp.1–15, published online 14 March 2011. Duke,
C., 2008. University Engagement: Avoidable Confusion and Inescapable Contradiction. Higher
Education Management and Policy, 20(2), pp.87–97. Duke, C., 2010. Engaging with Difficulty –
Universities in and with Regions. In Inman, P. & Schuetze, H. (Eds). The Community Engagement and
Service Mission of Universities. Leicester: NIACE, pp. 33–50. Duke, C., 2011. Winning the University
Engagement Narrative. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 30(5), pp.701–709. Ehrlich,
Thomas (2000). Civic Responsibility and Higher Education. Greenwood Publishing Group. Facer, K.,
Manners, P., Agusita, E (2012) Towards a Knowledge Base for University-Public Engagement: sharing
knowledge, building insight, taking action, NCCPE: Bristol Felt, U. & Fochler, M., 2008. The Bottom-
Up Meanings of the Concept of Public Participation in Science and Technology. Science and Public
Policy, 35(7), p.11. Fitzpatrick, Margaret Mary (1988). Social Responsibility in Higher Education.
NASPA Journal. Giroux H, (2010) ‘Lessons from Paolo Freire’, Chronicle of Higher Education, October
27. Giroux, H. (2002). “Neoliberalism, Corporate Culture and the Promise of Higher Education: The
University as a Democratic Public Sphere”. In Harvard Educational Review, 72(4). pp. 425-464 53
Goby, Valerie Priscilla and Nickerson, Catherine (2011). Introducing Ethics and Corporate Social
Responsibility at Undergraduate Level in United Arab Emirates: An Experiential Exercies on Website
Communication” in J Business Ethics (2012) 107: 103-109. Goddard, J., Kempton, L. & Vallance, P.,
2011. The Civic University: Connecting the Global and the Local, Newcastle University, UK. Guo,
Shibao (2006). Adult Education for Social Change: The Role of Grassroots Organizations in Canada.
Convergence 39.4: 107-122 Hall, B (n.d.) Towards a Knowledge Democracy Movement:
Contemporary Trends in Community-University Research Partnerships. School of Public
Administration, University of Victoria Hall, B (n.d) Higher Education, Community Engagement and
the Public Good: The Future of Continuing Education. Office of Community Based Research,
University of Victoria Hart, A with E Maddison, and D Wolff (2007) Community-University
partnerships in practice. Leicester: National Institute for Adult and Continuing Education Hart, A.,
Ntung, A., Millican, J., Davies, C., Wenger, E., Rosing, H. & Pearce, J., 2011. Community-University
Partnerships Through Communities of Practice. AHRC Connected Communities Review. O'Neil,
Peter. (2009). Higher education pays in many ways, OECD report says; Significant financial benefits;
And healthier, more socially cohesive societies The Gazette [Montreal, Que] 09 Sep 2009: A.2. Hart,
A., Maddison, E. & Wolff, (Eds), 2007. Community-University Partnerships in Practice, Leicester:
National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (England and Wales). Hersh, Richard H. and
Schneider, Carol G. (2005). “Fostering Personal and Social Responsibility on College and University
Campuses” In Liberal Education. Association of American Colleges and Universities. Hikins, J.W. &
Cherwitz, R.A., 2010. The Engaged University: Where Rhetorical Theory Matters. Journal of Applied
Communication Research, 38(2), pp.115–126. Ibrahim, Mohamed Izham Mohamed & Awang,
Rahmat & Razak, Dzulkifli Abdul (1998). “Introducing Social Pharmacy Courses to Pharmacy Students
in Malaysia”. In Medical Teacher. 20(2). Jay, G., 2010. The Engaged Humanities: Principles and
Practices for Public Scholarship and Teaching. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship,
3(1), pp.55–63. 54 Jones, Glen (2012). Higher Education in Canada. Retrieved From:
http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/hec/ Jongbloed, B., Jürgen, E. & Salerno, C., 2008. Higher Education
and its Communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a Research Agenda. Higher
Education, (56), pp.303–324. Kotecha (2010). Civic Engagement and Social Development.
Presentation to the Bellagio Conference of Talloires Network March 23-27, 2010. Retrieved From:
http://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/wpcontent/uploads/PiyushiKotechaBellagioPresentation.pdf Li
Xinyue Chen Min (n.d.) Citizenship of Colleges and Universities:Ernest L. Boyer's Views on University
Social Responsibility Retrieved From: http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-
YSJG201003014.htm Longanecker, David A. (2003). The Role of the Federal Government. National
Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Retrieved From:
http://www.highereducation.org/reports/aiheps/aiheps9.shtml McIlrath, Loraine and MacLabhrainn
(2007). Higher Education and Civic Engagement: International Perspectives. Burlington, VT: Ashgate
Publishing Company. (Book) Milton Bivens, Felix (2011) “Higher Education as Social Change: Seeking
a Systemic Institutional Pedagogy of Social Change” Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of
Philosophy. Institute of Development Studies University of Sussex, Brighton. Martí Noguera, J.J y
Martí Vilar, M. (2013) Una década de responsabilidad social universitaria en Iberoamérica. Grupo de
Estudios de responsabilidad social universitaria. Madrid: Revista Española del Tercer Sector,
25(1886-0400), (pp. 145-162).
http://roderic.uv.es/bitstream/handle/10550/33669/084300.pdf?sequence=1 Martí Noguera, Juan
Jose (2011) Responsabilidad Social Universitaria: Estudio acerca de los comportamientos, los valores
y la empatia en estudiantes de universidades iberamericanas. Universitat de Valencia. Retrieved
From: https://www.educacion.gob.es/teseo/imprimirFicheroTesis.do?fichero=30195 Nicholson,
Carolyn Y. & DeMoss, Michelle (2009). Teaching Ethics and Social Responsibility: An Evaluation of
Undergraduate Business Education at the Discipline Level. In Journal of Education for Business.
84(4). 55 Olney, Cynthia and Grande, Steve (1995). “Validation of a Scale to Measure Development
of Social Responsibility”. In Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning. Peterson, Luke (1998).
Higher education shouldn't just serve the marketplace Telegraph Journal. New Brunswick Telegraph
Journal. Petter, Andrew “Civic Engagement: Challenges and Opportunities” University of Victoria (To
the closing session of CU Expo08). Raghunadhan, T. (2009). “Strategy: A Pedagogy for Efficient,
Accountable and Socially Responsive Higher Education” Global Business and Management Research:
An International Journal. 1: 1, 36-49. (National Institute of Technology, Calicut, NIT Campus (PO),
India. Rama Rao, P. (2005). Reconstructing India: Investing in higher education and research.
Chemical Business. Rodriguez, G. F. and Diez, J. G. “Responsabilidad Social Universitaria” Trabajo Fin
de Master. Universidad de Oveido. Scott, Peter (1984). The Crisis of the University. Croom Helm.
Singh, Shreyasi (2013). “Challenges and Solutions in Indian Higher Education” In The Diplomat.
Retrieved from: http://thediplomat.com/2013/10/challenges-and-solutions-inindian-higher-
education/ Soriano, Oscar (n.d.) Responsabilidad Social Universitaria. Departamento de Filosofia.
Universidad National Autonoma de Honduras (UNAH). Tandon, R and Hall, B (n.d.) UNESCO Chair on
Community Based Research & Social Responsibilty in Higher Education: A Framework for Action
2012-2016. New Delhi: PRIA Tandon (2007), Civil Engagement in Higher Education and its Role in
Human and Social Development. New Delhi: PRIA - Society for Participatory Research In Asia.
Retrieved From: http://unescochair-
cbrsr.org/pdf/resource/Civill%20Engagement%20in%20Higher.pdf Teferra, Damtew & Altbach,
Philip G. (2004). “African Higher Education: Challenges for the 21st century”. In Higher Education,
(47), pp. 21-50. Klewer Academic Publishers. Netherlands. Times of India (2014). “Higher Education
must be more attentive to ethics: HRD Minister” Retrieved from:
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-12- 07/news/44903575_1_business-ethics-m-m-
pallam-raju-higher-education 56 Vallaeys, Francois (2007). Responsabilidad Social Universitaria:
Propuesta para una definicion madura e eficiente. Monterrey, Mexico: Tecnologico de Monterrey.
Varghese, N.V. (2012). “Governance Reforms in African Higher Education: The Missing Link” In
Chronicle of African Higher Education. Vasilescu, R., Barna, C., Epure, M., and Baicu, C. (2010).
Developing University Social Responsibility: A model for the challenges of the new civil society.
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 4177-4182 Votruba, James (1996). “Strengthening the
University’s Alignment with Society: Challenges and Strategies”. Journal of Public Service and
Outreach. 1(1) pp. 29-36. Watson, David (2007). Managing Civic and Community Engagement.
Berkshire: Open University Press. Watson, David (2003). Universities and Civic Engagement: A
Critique and a Prospectus. University of Queensland. Retrieved From:
http://staffcentral.brighton.ac.uk/cup/DW%20UoQ%20presentation.pdf Watson, David. (n.d) “Does
Higher Education Make You Think?” In The Guardian. Retrieved From:
http://www.theguardian.com/higher-educationnetwork/blog/2013/dec/13/higher-education-
impact-on-students ZHANG, Xiang-ming. (n.d.) The Social Responsibilities of Contemporary
Universities—— Thoughts on the Article Going Out of the“Ivory Tower”——The Social
Responsibilities of Contemporary Universities. Department of Education, Fujian Institute of
Education, China http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-FJXB200404019.htm