Women’s dilemma and social responsibilities: a study of a transmission tale in the early Lingbao scriptures

Portrayals of women and minorities advertising have long been of interest to advertising scholars. While research has found that the overall representation of these groups has increased, some stereotypes persist, and so do questions about the quality and prominence of portrayals. This study examines portrayals of minorities and women in Super Bowl advertising, the main “pop culture” showcase for US advertising. A content analysis of 10 years of Super Bowl ads is conducted and a multinomial logit regression model is employed to delve deeper into the content analysis results. Findings show that while the overall representation of women and various minority groups is strong, a deeper analysis shows that these groups are seldom depicted as primary characters by themselves and that some subtle stereotypes persist. We also find that ads featuring female principal characters are more likely to feature home settings, sexual appeals, emotional messages, and music as a major element and that it is less likely for female (vs. male) celebrities to be used. Minority principal characters are more likely to be celebrities and be included in ads with music or for technical products but are less likely to be included in ads featuring corporate social responsibility messages.

The portrayal of women has long been a concern, especially in cinema, including Indonesian cinema. The modern era of Indonesian cinema began in 1998 and continues to the present day, as the best period for Indonesian cinema. In 1998, only five films were produced, but production gradually increased until its peak in 2016, with 124 titles being produced. This growth has had a positive impact on the image of women in cinema, but it has also presented different values regarding the portrayal of women. This paper examines the portrayal of women characters in Indonesia's popular films, focusing on the top three best selling films. Using the textual analysis method, the study reveals that women are often portrayed in relation to stereotypes entrenched in patriarchal culture. Men still have a strong image as the provider and women are dependent objects. The findings also show that social values are the primary determinants of women's portrayal in film. For instance, in appearance, a good girl is appropriately dressed, will be saved and happy. In contrast, aggressiveness for women will lead them into destruction. The portrayal of women in Indonesian best seller movies cannot be separated from patriarchal and social values, which implies that these films not only reflect but also potentially reinforce and perpetuate existing gender norms and power dynamics within society. This suggests that the representation of women in such media plays a significant role in shaping public perceptions of gender roles, further embedding these values into the cultural fabric and potentially influencing the way women are treated and perceived in real life.

This research paper presents a sociological study of the influence of society on the portrayal of women in the Indian media, with a focus on electronic news channels in Noida. The study conducts a comparative analysis of past and present media trends to understand and investigate how women's portrayal in the media has evolved over time. The research methodology involved content analysis of news stories, analysis of news programs and interviews with journalists and media experts, featuring women on electronic news channels in Noida. The analysis was conducted for a specific period in the past and present to compare the portrayal of women in the media. The study found that although there has been progress in the representation of women in the media, gender biases, gender stereotypes and objectification still persist. Women are often portrayed as inferior to men, with limited roles and opportunities. The study identifies various societal factors that contribute to these biases, including patriarchal values, cultural norms, and economic interests also sometimes reinforce gender stereotypes and promote unrealistic beauty standards. The research also highlights the role of society in shaping the media's portrayal of women. Social norms and cultural values influence media content, and the media also reinforces societal norms. The study emphasizes the need for a more balanced and inclusive portrayal of women in the media and calls for the media to take responsibility for promoting gender equality.

Hellison's framework provides teachers with instructional strategies, program/lesson structure, individual goal-setting opportunities, and assessment strategies to tap into students' personal and social values and responsibilities. To support L.E.A.D. teacher candidates with teaching personal and social values and responsibilities in their practical teaching, L.E.A.D. teacher candidates are given training on T.P.S.R. This chapter explains how to implement this framework to teach personal and social responsibility, and includes future recommendations.

This article aims to explore and model the directions for shaping social responsibility in higher education institutions. The topic is of great relevance in the context of the digital era and structural transformations. The study examines the relationship between digital culture, digital knowledge, the level of digitalization, and the effectiveness of higher education institutions in fostering social responsibility. The research methodology employed a literature review and analysis of scientific studies and data. Based on the findings, a theoretical model was developed to illustrate the interconnection between digital culture, digital knowledge, the level of digitalization, and the quadrangle of responsibility: "Sociability – Economics – Ecology – Digitalization." The article proposes seven hypotheses that reflect the impact of digital culture, digital knowledge, and the level of digitalization on the formation of social responsibility in higher education institutions. The results of the study confirm that the development of digital culture, digital knowledge, and the level of digitalization are crucial factors in shaping social, economic, and ecological responsibility in higher education institutions. Universities that actively embrace digital technologies and cultivate a favorable digital culture contribute to the formation of socially responsible values among students and staff. Moreover, students equipped with digital skills and knowledge are better equipped to address economic challenges and make informed decisions considering social aspects. The application of digital technologies and intelligent ecological solutions also helps reduce the environmental impact of universities and raise environmental awareness among students. The practical significance of this article lies in its provision of concrete hypotheses and methodological approaches that can be applied by higher education institutions to implement social responsibility. The research findings can be valuable for universities and students interested in developing social and ecological values, as well as utilizing digital technologies to achieve these goals. The article contributes to the understanding of how digital culture, digital knowledge, and the level of digitalization play vital roles in shaping responsibility in higher education institutions. Overall, this article sheds light on the complex relationship between digitalization and social responsibility in the context of higher education. It offers valuable insights for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners seeking to foster social responsibility within educational institutions.

The objectives of this research were: 1) to study the principles of good governance in accordance with the rules and regulations of the office of the Thai Prime Minister; 2) to analyze Buddhist teachings related to the principles of good governance; and 3) to analyze the benefits of good governance principles in Buddhism for business and politics administration. This is a qualitative research. The researchers have studied and discovered the principles of good governance from Buddhist texts, books, documents, journals and related researches. The data were analyzed, discussed and presented in descriptive details along with analysis and recommendation per each aspect. The results of the research were found that: 1. The principles of good governance comprised of 6 important components: 1) Rule of law: enacting law, rule and regulation which are update, fair and just to everyone with equal implementation without discrimination. 2) Merit: praising virtue and merit; adhering to the rightness and goodness; and encouraging government officials and people to have honesty, sincerity, diligence, patience, discipline, and perform trustworthy occupations and professions. 3) Transparency: creating trust among each other by improving working mechanism of each person and organization to be transparent by revealing information straightforwardly, and providing ease to people in accessing the information. 4) Participation: Providing opportunities to people to participate, express ideas, set up plan and policy, and make decision on important issues. 5) Accountability: paying attention to public problems; placing importance on right, duty and social responsibility as well as having braveness to accept the results of his or her own conduct. 6) Economy: using limited resources for the great benefits; encouraging people not to spend luxurious life, and knowing to save and use resources worthily. 2. The principles of good governance in Buddhism can be presented as follows: 1) Rule of law: The Buddha enacted discipline with equity and fairness without discrimination; all Buddhist people have to practice in the same rule and discipline equally. 2) Merit: Buddhism praises merit and virtue more than other things. There are many Buddhist teachings related to good governance which can be presented as Dasarajadhamma or the tenfold code of the king or virtues of the ruler. 3) Transparency: Buddhism encourages Buddhist people to practice in the rule and discipline to be transparent by having good conduct in action, good conduct in word, and good conduct in thought. 4) Participation: Buddhism places great importance on participation; this can be seen in Aparihaniyadhamma, which means the principles leading never to decline but only to prosperity. 5) Accountability: Buddhism teaches that everyone is born with duty and responsibility to themselves, to their relatives and society; everyone has to be responsible for his or her own conduct. 6) Economy: Buddhism teaches people to use resources with saving and worthiness such as the principle of moderation (Mattannuta) which suggests people to have moderation, temperance, and sense of proportion in spending resources. 3. Good governance principles in Buddhism have great benefits for business and politics administration as follows: in terms of governance, good governance principles in Buddhism can help to improve the governance to have good discipline and regularity, eliminate misconduct and corruption. In terms of economy, good governance principles in Buddhism can generate fairness and equity in carrying on an occupation, and improve right and freedom in doing business with knowledge and capability. In terms of society, good governance principles in Buddhism can support and encourage the society to live with happiness and peace, create social equity and integrity, improve human right, and build society to have harmony and unity.

У статті розкриваються поняття особистості військового професіонала, необхідність формування особистості військового професіонала, сутність соціальної відповідальності військового професіонала. Доводиться, що соціальна відповідальність є важливою соціальною якістю особистості сучасного військового професіонала, яка виявляється у ставленні до виконання громадянського і військового обов’язку.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is highly valued by firms for seeking to drive corporate image. State-owned enterprises as special economic and social organizations also look forward to improving its corporate image through engaging into CSR, which is attracting more and more attention in academic and demands theoretical and empirical investigation. This study aims to examine the effects of CSR on corporate image in the SOEs of China. Based on a survey study we test the effects of six dimensions of CSR on two dimensions of corporate image. The authors find different effects of economic responsibility, organizational responsibility, employee responsibility, environmental responsibility, community responsibility and product responsibility on corporate image respectively. Moreover the authors identify the varied moderator effects of consumer CSR support on the relationships between CSR and corporate image. This study not only contributes to understand the internal impact mechanism of CSR on corporate image but also facilitates the explorations about the social context on CSR practices.KeywordsCorporate Social ResponsibilitySocial ResponsibilityCorporate Social Responsibility ActivityCorporate Social Responsibility PracticeCorporate ImageThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

The objective of this study is to examine how social values can be included in Physical Education (PE) and Sports to shape teenage students’ character. The study was conducted by systematically reviewing existing literature on this topic. The data was collected using the Scite software, specifically focusing on the reputable journals indexed in the Scopus and DOAJ databases. The search was limited to articles published between 2019 and 2024. The specified keywords were "Integration AND Social Values AND Physical Education AND Sports". In addition, the PRISMA technique was used as the main reference. According to the result, a total of 122 articles were discovered from these two databases. The study's findings highlighted the significance of incorporating social values into PE in order to develop teenage students’ character. It found the arena of physical exercise as the potential place to enhance student concentration, motivation, mental health, and academic accomplishment. Thus, revisiting the curriculum to align with students' interests and skills, enhance teachers' competency, upgrade facilities, and implement a forward-thinking and consistent sports strategy is crucial. PE and sports enable pupils to internalize social ideals, including respect, equality, cooperation, discipline, and responsibility. Family participation might additionally enhance and promote the assimilation of favourable values. This research also found that Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility (TPSR) and Active Values program are essential for integrating the values of responsibility and independence. Keywords: Integration, Social Values, Physical Education, Adolescent Students

Previous articleNext article FreePresidential AddressRecognizing Complexity in Our Changing Contexts: Centering What Matters in Comparative and International EducationKaren MonkmanKaren Monkman Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmailQR Code SectionsMoreIntroductionAs I write this address, we are in the third year of a global pandemic; an unprovoked assault on Ukraine is continuing unabated; climate change is impacting our lives and the ecosystems on which we depend; racial and gender violence continues; and a diminishing tolerance for difference is evident, whether related to sexuality and gender identities, religion and ethnicity, political orientation, among many others. The layering of these challenges has created a new reality for all of us, although some are impacted more than others. These conditions have affected our teaching, research, projects, how we engage with colleagues and mentor students—basically, all aspects of how we live and work. Even more so, communities with whom we work are impacted.Just as in the world, our field of comparative and international education (CIE) has also undergone changes, not only due to current global conditions, but due to the evolving ways of understanding how education is shaped by forces such as neoliberalism, poverty, social values, politics and environmental changes. Discursive framings of CIE embed particular agendas and ways of seeing the world, and they in turn shape how we think, understand, and act. More concretely, our field has seen an increase in the types and numbers of actors involved, including nonstate actors such as celebrities, billionaires, corporations, and others, each of whom has their own priorities and ways of engaging in education globally.Now more than ever, we need to understand with much more nuance these realities across diverse communities and within our changing field. We need to act in ways that are informed by a profound responsibility for the consequences, with, as I will suggest, a renewed focus on considering what really matters in and for the field.After reminding us of several ideas from previous presidential addresses, I will examine some key issues from CIES 2021—specifically, changing contexts and social responsibility—as an invitation to reexamine where we are, how we engage in our work and with each other. I invite you to consider a variety of questions to ponder, including:• What really matters? … to whom? … how? … why?• Whose interests are (and are not) being served?• To whom are we individually and collectively responsible? … for what? … how?• How are we implicated in creating or maintaining the social, political, and economic structures that impede education, or enable it, in ways that matter to people and communities we seek to serve?• How does our own work, the configuration of our professional relationships, and our discursive framing re-shape, reify, resist, or challenge structures of inequity and exclusion?• How does our work in education affect people’s lives, directly and indirectly, immediately and long-term?Our Shared HeritageTwenty years ago, Heidi Ross (2002) began her presidential address by situating her focus within the challenges she observed in how students and others grappled with making sense of education and society in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States. In noting the need for critical dialogue, she called for a renewed relational orientation in our work—for reconsidering the “space between us” (416). In using “metaphors and imagery of relational theories to think with,” she argues, we can then (a) center a critical analysis of “conceptualizations of democracy, globalization, connection, and difference,” (b) “take seriously the issues of ‘identity work,’” and (c) “move toward social justice” (411).We have known for a long time that education serves some populations well and underserves others. In 2004, Kassie Freeman observed that “looking but not seeing has led to the underutilization of human potential” (443), particularly in Black communities. Freeman (2004) explaines the costs to those whose potential is underutilized: “Having their talents underutilized over the centuries has had a negative impact on the psychological being (self-esteem and confidence) because the costs of underutilizing their potential has gone to the heart and soul of black populations” (451–52). Not being seen is a form of violence that has profound negative implications. We might apply that point to our field more broadly, by saying: “looking but not seeing” (443) as we form or interpret policy, measure progress, teach others, or engage in collaborations can easily result in a diminished, and sometimes counterproductive outcomes that further challenge rather than help people and communities. Using “seeing as a metaphor [is useful for] capturing difference, the depth of understanding of that difference, and the plight of the human condition” (444).Ross and Freeman built on the work of Vandra Maseman (1990), who, 14 years earlier, had challenged us to use paradigms in our thinking and our work that are “holistic, context dependent, and integrative” (471), because these paradigms can promote a more integrated understanding of our place in the world, by conceptualizing knowledge not as fragmented, or some forms as less important than others, but as integrated wholes. She argues: “our conception of ways of knowing have limited and restricted the very definition of comparative education that we have taught students and used in our own research and, indeed, have promulgated to practitioners” (465). This has led “to willful ignoring or bypassing of large areas of teaching and learning that are not considered in the domain of valid knowledge” (465)—this, in turn constricts our awareness of possibility.N’Dri Assié-Lumumba (2016) also resonated with those ideas and challenged us to be more inclusive and holistic in choosing how we frame our own ways of seeing and knowing. Ubuntu, she argues, is an alternative way to frame not only our work but also how we see ourselves in the world. It is about a sense of shared humanity, a rich sense of community and collectivity, a recognition that we are all connected to each other and to the broader ecosystems within which we live. In this Ubuntu framing, we would think differently about knowledge, how we know, and power relations across time and location.Finally, beyond human-to-human experience, Iveta Silova (2021) called for more attention to environmental concerns and climate change, recognizing that we, as humans, are integral to a much larger environment and often act in ways that are destructive to our own life spaces.Across these addresses, past CIES presidents have called upon us not only to look, but also see, and to consider the space between us. We are also called upon to reconsider how we situate ourselves among others, and also in relationship to particular ways of knowing and the production of knowledge itself. These orientations are important for positioning humanity and meaningful social relationships at the center of our work—especially in today’s world with increasingly challenging conditions.CIES 2021: Social Responsibility within Changing ContextsThe theme of the CIES 2021 annual meeting, “Social Responsibility within Changing Contexts,” was an invitation to consider a variety of complexities related to changing contexts and our own individual and collective social responsibility.1 Like the presidential addresses noted above, these issues invite us to consider who we are, how we engage, what influences our understandings that inform how we engage, and how that engagement has consequences for others.Changing ContextsThere are many dimensions of context that are changing. After broadly contextualizing our changing world, I will focus on three dimensions: increasing precarity in today’s world, changing education/development discourses, and the expanded variety of actors in the field (i.e., the changing social/collaborative terrain).The world in which we find ourselves now is not the world that shaped the development of our work several decades ago, or even our work a few years ago. We are now experiencing rapid changes in basic life conditions which affect education, and, in turn, changes in education which affects life conditions. Most obvious in these current times is the global COVID-19 pandemic, which has not only forced changes in how CIES creates space for coming together in our annual meetings and how our professional relationships develop but has also radically altered how schooling is experienced globally, how nonformal and informal modes of learning occur (or not), how policy is created and understood, how research is conducted, and how we decide what is worth learning or knowing. Teachers worldwide were either forced to pivot to teach online, usually with little support or knowledge about how to do so—or for those where adequate or appropriate technology was not available, teachers were left without work as schools closed completely (UNICEF 2021; UNESCO Institute for Statistics, n.d.). Disparities in school closures and in access to technology have intensified already existing inequities (World Bank 2021). Beyond teaching, many researchers have moved to conducting interviews on virtual platforms, for example, which impacts the building of rapport and the development of nuanced understandings (both of which are critical for the collection of meaningful qualitative data). This shift also limits who is available as research participants (due in part to in/accessibility to technology). Others have stopped their research or shifted to other topics that are doable with pandemic restrictions, thereby changing the contours of knowledge production. In addition, many people struggle with social isolation due to lockdowns and social distancing.Beyond the COVID-19 pandemic are critical concerns about climate change, racial injustice and xenophobia, gender violence, increasing poverty, forced displacement, and the increased politicizing of migration along with a wide range of other social concerns. Globally, of the 26 million refugees—the highest number ever recorded—half are children, and 85 percent are being hosted in developing countries (Amnesty International, n.d.). Over 100 million people are forcibly displaced globally (Siegfried 2022), including 12.8 million people in Ukraine (Treisman 2022; UN-OHCHR 2022). International students of color have had a hard time crossing borders to escape the war in Ukraine, since neighboring countries do not welcome them as readily as White Ukrainians (Benavot 2022; Okeowo 2022). Conditions such as these are layered and intertwined, multiplying today’s challenges. Gender violence remains an endemic part of social strife, increasing in times of war and in conditions of domestic isolation as in a pandemic (Moaveni and Nagarajan 2022). In addition, world hunger is increasing, reflected in a doubling of severe food insecurity in the last 2 years (United Nations 2022).Fake news, belief in unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, and hate rhetoric add to the complexities we struggle with today. Global warming is still denied or downplayed by some (Dunlap and Jacques 2013). And, the global pandemic also has its deniers (Krugman 2021; Spring 2021), despite solid science about the virus and over 6 million lives lost worldwide (WHO 2022).Along with these recent contextual changes, we see other conditions continue to evolve, adding to individual and collective challenges. Neoliberal policies, for example, continue to constrain the work of teachers; narrow the curriculum; prioritize assessments over meaningful learning; and disadvantage some schools over others, growing the gaps in achievement (Lubienski and Brewer 2019).Woven throughout all of these dynamics and more, supporting some elements and undermining others, is the global circulation of cultural values and ideas, including through social media (Anderson 2016). Our globalized world connects us all and enables real time communication, as long as one has access to particular technologies. Even so, the ideas that flow around the world are often controlled by those in positions of power (Brøgger et al. 2016; Menashy 2019) and accessed only by those with the required technology—we are not all engaged in the same conversations, so we do not all have access to the same knowledge and ideas.All of these conditions, and more, affect our work and our lives, and, more importantly, the lives of the people we are striving to support through our work. The experiences of these conditions and dynamics are not the same for everyone. For increasing numbers of people these layered and rapidly changing conditions make their lives precarious.2Precarious ConditionsThis layering of challenging conditions we now experience is increasingly referred to as precariousness or precarity.3 Although these terms have long been used to describe unstable conditions of employment, the terms are now also used to now describe conditions of life much more broadly. Judith Butler (2009) argues that precarity is a politically induced condition, in which, “certain populations suffer from failing social and economic networks of support and become differentially exposed to injury, violence, and death. Such populations are at a heightened risk of disease, poverty, starvation, displacement, and of exposure to violence without protection” (25–26).Conditions of precarity include unpredictability, vulnerability, insecurity, instability, and the like.4 For many, “precarious situations and events are like rugged terrains: every step must be carefully preconceived and decisively taken and, even then, one can never be certain that s/he has firm ground under his or her feet” (della Porta et al. 2015, 2). Precarization has been described as “[penetrating] entire life-worlds of individuals and groups of people” (della Porta et al. 2015, 2, citing others).Those on the social margins are impacted most (Butler 2009; Perry et al. 2021). When intersections of multiple forces of instability, insecurity, vulnerability, and unpredictability are present, it is easy to see that precariousness is exacerbated. This demands that we not only “look” but also “see” the realities of life of those we presume to help through our work, so that our actions have a better chance to reduce precariousness and alter the structures that create these realities.These changing conditions—especially those that increase precarity—raise important questions about who has a right to learn and has access to learning, how to make learning available to those less able to adapt to today’s realities, what is worth learning, what is worth teaching, and even what education is for (Dovemark and Beach 2016). Grappling with these increasingly complex global challenges also raises questions such as: what kinds of policy would best support more equitably distributed education across disparate populations as we grapple with these increasingly complex global challenges. And finally, who is, can, and should be involved, and how, in these processes?The CIE professional terrain is also changed in these precarious times. Funding, jobs, mobility restrictions, organizational priorities, and other challenges have resulted in many losing jobs or having hours, salaries, or benefits cut. Limitations in travel due to the pandemic or lack of funding reduces opportunities to do fieldwork (whether related to projects or research) and to join colleagues at conferences.These precarious times demand that we reimagine how we come together in CIES, as has been evident in the most recent annual meetings. Even in virtual interactions, we notice different communication networks which likely fragment our communications within CIE. Who is talking with whom on what platforms? Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, WeChat, Zoom, e-mail, text, or phone—not everyone is engaged in or has access to all of these, so conversations, the sharing of ideas, and ways of thinking and framing of issues discursively are likely occurring among particular groups and not others.Discourses: Ways of ThinkingWords and images matter, especially in policy. They change how we make sense of what we do and how we do it. They condition how we see the world, and what we decide is important. As Ross did 5 years before him, Victor Kobayashi (2007) highlighted the role of metaphors in his presidential address, and Ruth Hayhoe (2000) discussed metanarratives in hers. Similarly, discourses—the ideological underpinnings embedded in the ways we use words and images—shape how we and others think and understand (Ninnes 2004; Ball 2006; Allan 2012). The reason I raise this here is to call attention not just to the concrete language that we use but also to the need to unpack it, to more fully examine the discursive underpinnings of how we make sense of our worlds and how we live and work within them. Discursive shifts are another layer of changing contexts.In work on girls’ education, for example, policy discourses, such as in the sustainable development goals (SDGs), continue to prioritize counting bodies in seats (access, enrollments, gender parity, etc.) rather than messier (and more difficult to measure) research related to quality, content, empowerment, and other critical issues (Monkman and Hoffman 2013). To see our work differently, we must be willing to reexamine our underlying assumptions (discourses). Gayatri Spivak (2021), our Kneller lecturer at CIES argues that a and … how we come to is She this point by saying: real are the and is to are other our to see how others think and how they are to life conditions is to understanding other more issues differently can new with shape how we understand our own field. We are a diverse from many with ideological but we also to with those who do work and with whom we the numbers and variety of actors in the field this does not us How well do we understand particularly those of our new nonstate in our field who the between and nonstate actors in their work be in a to help interpret these especially to be often from where and how we are from our and our own ways of and the ideological can to inform of and in the variety of actors in our field is How they are in development work changes the among that is, relationships and assumptions that inform priorities and et al. 2016; Menashy actors and policy of nonstate celebrities, billionaires, and so to help the world. The long of of a of by the and see has expanded to many more and use for education work, and their as They about their to but research that benefits to and only sometimes to the communities they are to research, for example, how and in and of color as of that this benefits the positioning them new of to new in the Global but without changing the structures of that would or in communities (or other called for and for in their relationships with and as in their and as well as of their and these relationships, to whom and for what are these are, in of a larger often as part of their social responsibility What like in this environment but it is to with their new actors we see a wide variety of to funding from some whose goals are to the to others that are in their own to Like most have their own priorities, and many lack a knowledge of the field. In one I was with, a funding the their to the as they the communities to create priorities to their that their the communities and the experienced had the knowledge and and they the of In in another the that the did not to understand a to social to make the was on the of whether the participants to around one as by the even the was to enable communities to decide for what issues they The measure of did not from the or usually the form of For example, their and or as a way to awareness of particular development international have 2022), and are a few in the development world. many by are for education (or to be to their For example, and the known and his with They the the jobs were not their lives as a was was known for in Others have through their work in for example, known through his about schools in and and the of his education work on and development have now created whose is to with more research is on the benefits to the communities that are to be the benefits to the or to the argues that complexities of development that for can be or failing to the real underlying these and have and some do work. have goals that or do not often have the to the of education globally or in or to understand complex social issues as they with To the it that these are the world, but they had been better more have been and the challenges they have been and also about a that they had work on girls’ education globally and before that many of us have been in this for of these new actors are very well to frame the education issues in the ways in which large understand our not and 2021). This also impacts the ways that relationships are and engaged in the actors in our field have more in and the language of and have of to some they are not without including the in power among the More have actors and other nonstate actors as those discussed sometimes as the of funding and sometimes as key et al. and 2021). questions about whose agendas are more in and what the are of the particular power relations within recent international has changed in recent with numbers of increasingly diverse actors involved, as well as more through which is She conceptualizing these changes in the of new actors and relationships as not because the of where multiple actors come to the as and work toward a is in today’s world. does not the relationships, or in the of these relationships can result in disparate influences in policy a at the the power of nonstate actors is evident and 2021; 2021). Menashy and their related as increasingly education and having a much larger in policy In Global are and are now of several As part of a they become able to shape although not about nonstate actors in and research has that some but also many in the Global the policy (Brøgger et al. 2016). research the networks through which policy are by the Global and development at recent CIES have also power inequities in and have the power relations of those at the policy or on the of these policy networks not having a in policy. the of and the discursive underpinnings are integral to understanding what social responsibility to different actors and what is focus in the 2021 CIES theme us to unpack how we understand social at CIES 2021 we a variety of of social world the social although this narrow was not the of the CIES 2021 that should have a responsibility beyond their it is also as a social and environmental with its and et al. 2015, that be to can prioritize or the world at large and have elements related to or In the of social responsibility us to consider what a broader understanding of social responsibility might in the work by the increasing variety of actors in education globally, including To many of us in CIES, it would a much more at the and our priorities, and so to

Three Models of Corporate Social Responsibility: Interrelationships between Theory, Research, and Practice

China is determined to accomplish universal preschool education by asking the kindergartens to participate in social responsibility programs. This study intends to assess the level of participation of inclusive kindergartens in social responsibility programs. This study uses the Delphi expert method, integrated ISO26000 International Standard Guidelines for Social Responsibility, CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) Scale, and the characteristics of the preschool education industry to construct a social responsibility evaluation model for inclusive kindergartens. It includes five dimensions (responsibility management, customer responsibility, employee responsibility, social service, and organizational responsibility) to show the social responsibility status of kindergartens. Data was collected from 832 respondents from 27 provinces, cities, and regions in China. This study reveals that the overall performance of social responsibility of inclusive kindergarten (3.67) is better, while organization responsibility (3.91) shows the highest performance. In comparison, customer (3.63) and staff responsibility (3.63) deliver average performance, and responsibility management (3.56) offers lower performance. The statistical analysis shows that the nature of kindergartens, whether inclusive or not, the number of classes, years of establishment, the distribution area, and performance are different. Kindergartens should have certain social values, including specific behaviors and participating in social activities in the spirit of social service. They should ensure preschool teacher's professional and vocational development through multiple subjects' synergetic governance. In addition to fulfilling the teachers' social responsibility and professional development, the findings can put forward the cooperation with the government, social organizations, and kindergartens to improve teachers' professional quality and social responsibility.

Despite the existing stereotype about the passivity of Russian youth toward social issues, the realities of modern Russia reveal an opposite trend, which is largely observed within the realm of non-political activity among young people. This study focuses on the social activity of youth, its relationship with social responsibility, and the social context of the country, analyzed through the lens of its perception and attitudes toward it. In terms of perception and attitudes, particular attention is given to examining the role of the perceived «real» and expected «ideal» social contexts, as well as the gap between them in shaping the social activity and responsibility of Russian youth. The study sample included 821 Russians aged 15 to 35 (285 men and 536 women), predominantly from Moscow and Kazan. The research was conducted in 2021 through an online survey. The author’s methodology covered three key areas of social activity: environmental issues, social inequality, and politics. Validated scales were used to assess the perceived and expected social context of the country, as well as the level of social responsibility. The results underscored the importance of the influence of the perceived «real» and expected «ideal» contexts of the country on the level of social activity among youth. Respondents who evaluated the «real» social context of the country as problematic and perceived the state’s approach to issues of environmental protection, social inequality, and politics as insufficient demonstrated higher levels of social activity. At the same time, the expected «ideal» context was not directly related to social activity but influenced it indirectly through social responsibility. Further-more, data analysis revealed that the greater the gap between the perceived «real» and expected «ideal» contexts of the country, the higher the level of social activity among youth.

This study investigates teachers' perceptions and practices concerning the integration of cultural and social contexts into teaching in Vietnam, with the aim of enhancing students' social responsibility. A comprehensive survey was conducted involving 1,281 students and 51 Natural Science teachers from secondary schools in the Central Highlands of Vietnam. The findings reveal that while teachers of natural sciences in this region are acutely aware of the significance of incorporating local cultural and social contexts into their instruction to foster students' social responsibility, its actual implementation is infrequent, primarily due to various challenges, including limited resources, time constraints, and a lack of training. Furthermore, the student survey results show no significant improvement in their social responsibility, suggesting that current teaching practices may not be effectively addressing this critical educational goal. In light of these findings, several recommendations are proposed, including the expansion of targeted training programs and ongoing support for teachers on how to effectively integrate cultural and social contexts into their teaching practices. The outcomes of this study offer valuable insights for educators in Vietnam, aiding them in designing more effective instructional activities for natural science subjects in alignment with the educational objectives outlined in the 2018 General Education Program.

У статті на основі фундаментальних ідей системного, середовищного, особистісно-діяльнісного, факторного, культурологічного, акмеологічного, синергетичного підходів розкрито суть формування соціальної відповідальності учнів у мікросередовищі. Розроблена система формування соціальної відповідальності складається із компонентів (цільового, змістовного, технологічного, об’єктно-суб’єктного, середовищного) та має такі властивості: цілісність, емерджентність, цілеспрямованість, доцільність, структурність, ієрархічність, синергізм, інформаційність, відкритість, рівновага, стійкість, динамічність, надійність, концептуальність