2010 Social Responsibility Report

anandd
Prepared By
Mr. Clary Brown
Research Analyst
Office of Institutional Research and Analysis
Montgomery College
Dr. MichelleT. Scott
Chief Board Operations Officer
Montgomery College
MONTGOMERY COLLEGE:
A STEWARD OF SERVICE
Montgomery College Social Responsibility
Internal Advisory Committee
Discovery Phase Report
May 2009

Changing Lives
We are in the business of changing lives.
Students are the center of our universe.
We encourage continuous learning for
our students, our faculty, our staff, and our community.
Enriching our Community
We are the community’s college.
We are the place for intellectual, cultural, social, and political dialogue.
We serve a global community.
Holding Ourselves Accountable
We are accountable for key results centered around learning.
We will be known for academic excellence by every
high school student and community member.
We inspire intellectual development through
a commitment to the arts and sciences.
We lead in meeting economic and workforce development needs.

We Will Tend to Our Internal Spirit.
Adopted by the Montgomery College Board of Trustees • July 17, 2000

Our Internal Spirit
We are committed to high academic and performance
standards and take pride in our collective achievements.
We are welcoming, compassionate,
and service-oriented to our diverse communities.
We operate in a creative, innovative, flexible,
and responsive manner.
We practice collaboration, openness, honesty,
and widely shared communications.
Integrity, trust, and respect guide our actions.
We value and respect academic vitality and excellence.
Our spirit is renewed through enthusiasm, celebration,
a sense of humor, and fun.
Adopted by the Montgomery College Board of Trustees • July 17, 2000

Board of Trustees
for FY2010
Dr. Hercules Pinkney
Secretary-Treasurer,
Board of Trustees
Interim President,
Montgomery College
Ms. Gloria Aparicio
Blackwell
(2009–2014)
Social Responsibility Internal Advisory Committee Discovery Phase Report3
Pic to Come
Dr. Michael C. Lin
(2000–2012)
Chair
Mr. Stephen Z. Kaufman
(2001–2013)
First Vice Chair
Ms. Georgette W. Godwin
(2001–2013)
Second Vice Chair
Mr. Reginald M. Felton
(2007–2013)
Mr. Leslie Levine
(2009–2015)
Mr. Kenneth Massada
(2009–2010)
Student Member
Ms. Roberta F. Shulman
(1991–2011)
Ms. Marcia Suggs Smith
(2009–2010)

Membership of Montgomery College Social
Responsibility Internal Advisory Committee
Discovery Dialogue Facilitators
Social Responsibility Internal Advisory Committee Discovery Phase Report 4
Ms. Kemi Adeaga
Ms. Liliana Arango
Dr. Albert Baca (Tito)
Dr. Brian Baker
Ms. Kit-Wah Boyce
Dr. Monica Brown
Mr. William Campbell
Dr. Lisa Carvallo
Ms. Carmen D’Agostino
Ms. Enas Elhanafi
Ms. Evelyn Gonzalez-Mills
Ms. Arlean Graham
Mr. Steve Greenfield
Dr. Francine Jamin
Ms. Vivian Lawyer
Dr. Carl Luty
Mr. Aaron Montenegro
Mr. Marshall Moore
Ms. Heather Morris
Dr. L. Miller Newman
Ms. Nancy Nuell
Dr. Karen Penn de Martinez
Dr. Hercules Pinkney
Dr. Deborah Preston
Mr. Marcus Rosano
Ms. Shereece Savoy
Dr. Michelle T. Scott
Mr. David Sears
Mr. John Silas
Ms. Yvonne Stephens
Dr. Clarice Somersall
Ms. Lynette Telford
Ms. Kike Togbe-Obory
Ms. Krista Walker
Dr. Robert Walker
Mr. James Walters
Dr. Brenda C. Williams
Ms. Jacki Zappala
Mr. Wayne Barbour
Ms. Marlinda Boxley
Dr. Athos Brewer
Ms. Robin Cook
Dr. Jennifer Jones Dobbins
Ms. Rowena D’Souza
Dr. Kamala Edwards
Ms. Marva Fletcher
Ms. Joice Furtado
Ms. Evelyn Gonzalez-Mills
Mr. Steve Greenfield
Dr. Tony Hawkins
Ms. Audrey Hill
Dr. Francine Jamin
Ms. Sharon Kauffman
Mr. Taino Laine
Dr. Lucy Laufe
Dr. Carl Luty
Ms. Kim McGettigan
Ms. Binta Mouansie
Dr. Buddy Muse
Dr. Joan Naake
Mr. Kenneth Nelson
Dr. L. Miller Newman
Ms. Nancy Nuell
Dr. Ijeoma Otigbuo
Dr. Karen Penn de Martinez
Mr. Kevin Polite
Ms. Carmen Poston-Farmer
Dr. Deborah Preston
Dr. Rodney Redmond
Ms. Clevette Ridguard
Dr. Michelle T. Scott
Ms. Hilda Smith
Mr. Nathan Starr
Ms. Kathy Stevens
Ms. Lynette Telford
Mr. Marlon Vallejo
Mr. James Walters
Dr. Brenda C. Williams
Dr. Harold Williams
Dr. Janet Womack

College Resources to the Committee
Acknowledgments
Ms. Ria Bacalzo, student assistant, Office of
Equity and Diversity
Ms. Jennifer Baugh, creative services director,
Institutional Advancement
Mr. David Capp, associate vice president for
College facilities
Ms. Jan Cubar, deputy chief facilities officer
Mr. John Lauer, contract services coordinator/graphic
designer, Auxiliary Services/Contract Services
Ms. Shereece Savoy, AmeriCorps Vista member
Mr. Steve Wolf, contract services coordinator,
Auxiliary Services/Contract Services
Ms. Monika Zakrzewska, graphic designer,
Montgomery College Academic Assembly
Montgomery College Staff Senate
Montgomery College Office of Creative Services,
Montgomery College Office of Facilities
Montgomery College Office of Institutional
Research and Analysis
This report was prepared in collaboration with several individuals at the College. The authors of this report
and the Social Responsibility Internal Advisory Committee acknowledge the support of the following Mont-
gomery College individuals in the preparation of this report.
Dr. Lisa Carvallo, director, Career Pathway Programs
Dr. Francine Jamin, director, Paul Peck Institute for
American Culture and Civic Engagement
Dr. L. Miller Newman, director, Center for Teaching
and Learning
Dr. Deborah Preston, instructional and college dean
for the arts
Dr. Brenda C. Williams, director, Employment Services
Refugee Training Center

Foreword 7
Executive Summary 9
Discovery Dialogues, Social Responsibility Survey, and
Institutional Reports and Documents 11
Summary and Recommendations 17
Appendix 1: Discovery Dialogues and Survey 20
Appendix 2: Montgomery College Faculty, Staff, and Student Socially
Responsible Activities, Projects, Organizational Affiliations, and Causes 21
Appendix 3: Social Responsibility Survey Participant Demographics 23
Contents
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful,
committed citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
”~ Margaret Mead

A core value inherent in Montgomery College’s mis-
sion statement, “We are the community’s college…”
is its commitment to being a socially responsible
corporate citizen within our local and global communi-
ties. The College’s social impact is mission driven and
rooted in a philosophy and commitment of relating
to and with our communities to pursue what is
universally possible together for the public good.
Based upon this vision, members of the internal Col-
lege community have been on an introspective and
reflective yearlong journey to discover, identify, and
understand its social impacts. Through an inclusive
and deliberative process, the College sought to dis-
cover answers to the question—what is Montgomery
College’s social impact? A key to determining the
College’s social impact was identifying its relation-
ships and partnerships with and services to the
community. Within the context of our social impact,
this is the first time in approximately 10 years that our
College community members have taken the time to
specifically and comprehensively identify the types
and varieties of its community relationships, commu-
nity partnerships, and services within the community.
This journey has been an introspective prerequisite for
developing and prioritizing a comprehensive College
plan of action to successfully achieve an institutional
agenda for social responisibility.
Members were asked to begin working toward this
goal. First, comprehensive research on social
responsibility and public policy initiatives in corporate
America and within higher education was conducted.
Second, based upon this research and other
research, a briefing paper was developed entitled
Conceptualizing an Agenda for Social Responsibility
and Public Policy at Montgomery College. Third, a
Social Responsibility Internal Advisory Committee
was formed—composed of faculty, staff, and stu-
dents. This committee has been actively engaged
in the preliminary work of identifying a pedagogical
process that includes discovering the principles of
excellence that faculty, staff, and students value for
sustaining a culture of social responsibility at Mont-
FOREWORD
WHAT IS MONTGOMERY
COLLEGE’S
SOCIAL
IMPACT?

gomery College. Fourth, a social responsibility Web
page was established on the Office of Equity and Di-
versity Web site; this page has information about the
Social Responsibility Internal Advisory Committee, its
proposed work plan, and other resource information.
The link is www.montgomerycollege.edu/
Departments/OED/responsibility.htm.
Finally, as a result of an inclusive and deliberative
process, the Social Responsibility Internal Advisory
Committee discovered that through our faculty, staff,
administrators, and students the College’s social
impact is broad and far-reaching inside and outside of
the classroom, within Montgomery County, throughout
the region, and across the globe. Many of the College’s
social responsibility-related activities are decentralized.
However, a survey revealed that our faculty, staff, stu-
dents, and several College units are proactively engag-
ing, both formally and informally, in a variety of activities
and projects with more than 150 nonprofit civic and
community-based organizations. Collectively, these
activities and projects connect the College and com-
munity and positively impact the quality of life within our
diverse and global communities. Much of this activity
happens, however, with considerable anonymity, with-
out faculty and staff incentives or rewards, and without
faculty and staff expectation of formal recognition from
the College. This activity seemingly occurs because
there is a stewardship of service culture at the College
among our faculty, staff, and students; their common
goals are helping others, enriching the community,
and thinking of and acting for the greater good.
The social impact of the College’s faculty, staff, and
student activities and projects are observable through
multiple lenses, including intellectual, environmen-
tal, social, cultural, health and wellness, political,
geo-political, scientific, volunteerism and service,
community/civic engagement, and financial. These
activities and projects epitomize our internal College
community’s unwavering personal and professional
commitment to advancing social justice, building
stronger communities, and championing service. The
College’s social impact has positively distinguished
this institution and its relationships with the commu-
nity. Moreover, these activities and projects are not
only cornerstones of the College’s mission, but also
exemplary examples of the College and community’s
commitment to collaboratively create occasions for
authentically engaging to make decisions about the
world we share—as it will be, not as it is.

1. Discover(i.e., to appreciate what
we already are doing at Montgomery College that cur-
rently demonstrates the scope and depth of our social
impact and commitment to social responsibility and
public policy)
2. Dream(i.e., to imagine what Mont-
gomery College might do to demonstrate the scope
and depth of our social impact and our commitment
to social responsibility and public policy)
3. Design(i.e., to determine what needs
to be done further to demonstrate the scope and
depth of our social impact and commitment to social
responsibility and public policy)
4. Destiny(i.e., to create a possible
organizational structure that demonstrates the scope
and depth of our social impact and our commitment
to social responsibility and public policy)
5. Disseminate(i.e., to openly
and transparently communicate often with our various
internal and external stakeholders about our collective
work and stewardship role in the Dream, Design, and
Destiny phases of a Social Responsibility Agenda)
The committee has been calling the first step of its tacti-
cal strategic process the Discovery Phase. An important
part of the Discovery Phase was the internal mapping of
social responsibility here at Montgomery College. Thus,
the purposes of this phase were to (a) gain insights and
perspectives about social responsibility that reflect the
social impacts, values, and interests of the College’s
many and diverse internal stakeholders and (b) determine
the strategic and tactical next steps for exploring and
implementing a comprehensive College plan of action for
ensuring sustainability. For this phase, the committee has
been engaging our students, faculty, and staff through
the Discovery Dialogues and the Social Responsibility
Survey.
Within an eight-month period, the committee conducted
25 dialogues that were hosted across the College to
facilitate the participation and input of faculty, students,
and staff; distributed a paper and Web survey; and
reviewed institutional documents and reports. Although
the committee recognizes that there are generally no
monolithic perspectives even among affinity groups, the
dialogues were set up exclusively for faculty, students,
staff, and administrators groups. Taken together, roughly
1,200 students, faculty, and staff participated in the
dialogues and the survey and submitted just over 3,700
responses to the survey questions. Both the dialogues
and survey were designed to learn about all the wonder-
ful things already happening at Montgomery College that
should be acknowledged, celebrated, and promoted in
the area of social responsibility.
Executive Summary
The Montgomery College Social Responsibility Internal Advisory Committee adopted and adapted appreciative
inquiry as a strategic tactical approach for conducting its work. The committee’s overall tactical strategies were
formulated as five appreciative inquiry steps:

“Being respectful to everyone,
and understanding cultures and
background differences which add
to the dynamic of a community...
”~ Student
Of the Social Responsibility Surveys that were sent out,
472 students, 302 faculty, 291 staff, and 37 administra-
tors replied. Student voices constituted a significant
portion of the survey participants—43% of the sample.
The next largest participant group was that of our
faculty, comprising 27% of the sample. These faculty
participants represented 24% of the College faculty
roster. Staff participants were 26% of the sample. These
staff participants represented 22% of the College full-
time staff. Finally, administrator participants constituted
roughly half of the College administrators. The dialogue
and survey participant responses provide a seminal
picture of the College’s current level of commitment to
creating a positive social impact, as well as the chal-
lenges that lie ahead.
A cadre of 42 faculty, staff, and student volunteers was
trained to facilitate and record the Discovery Dialogues.
Both at the College and within Montgomery County, this
cadre of volunteers was representative of the College’s
diverse cultural and ethnic communities and diverse
languages. Since Montgomery College is one of the most
diverse colleges in the country, the Social Responsibil-
ity Internal Advisory Committee determined that it was
important to identify a multicultural and multilingual team
to facilitate the Discovery Dialogues.
Through the dialogues and survey, members of the Col-
lege community offered a range of perspectives about
Montgomery College’s social responsibility activities and
social impacts. Among the committee’s key findings
is the fact that the faculty, staff, students, and several
College units are already engaged in a variety of socially
responsible activities, although much of the College’s
social responsibility-related commitments is decentralized.
Faculty and staff favor an organizational structure that
centralizes, reports, and assesses the College’s social
impacts and socially responsible activities, projects, and
programs. Most members of the internal College com-
munity believe that the College has an obligation to make
a social impact that reaches far beyond the classroom,
but there is a wide array of socially responsible activities
and philosophies at the College.
This report is a summary of the Montgomery College
internal community’s voice about our social impacts,
and the report provides recommendations that represent
some standards of excellence for sustaining and expand-
ing the College’s social impact footprint. The data used
for this report are from the Social Responsibility Discovery
Dialogues, Social Responsibility Survey, and institutional
reports and documents. The committee recognizes the
Discovery Phase and this report as the beginning of an
authentic engagement process that will allow all of us,
working together, to continue formulating and implement-
ing ideas that will enhance the College’s social impact.

Key Findings
Discovery Dialogues, Social
Responsibility Survey, and
Institutional Reports and
Documents
Within the contemporary higher education community,
personal responsibility and social responsibility are
rapidly becoming the terms used to characterize insti-
tutional commitment and practices for relating to and
with local and regional communities for the well-being
of society. A key finding from the Discovery Dialogues
and Social Responsibility Survey is, however, that the
term social responsibility has not been the traditional
language used for describing Montgomery College’s
core mission, activities, and practices. Furthermore,
there is no evidence of specific social responsibility
language in the current College mission statement or
a commonly held formal social responsibility definition
at the College. However, social responsibility is intrin-
sically embedded in the College’s informal organiza-
tional culture, and socially responsible activities are
apparent in the College practices.
The College is already engaged in a level of socially
responsible service that spans an awe-inspiring array
of activities and philosophies. Every internal Col-
lege constituency group is playing a significant role

to ensure our social impact. Members of the internal
College community who participated in the Discovery
Dialogues and Social Responsibility Survey believe
that the College has an obligation to make a social
impact that reaches far beyond the classroom. Most
notably, the faculty, staff, and students do not confine
their involvement in socially responsible activities to
those organized and hosted solely by the College.
Indeed, some of our employees and students made
a point of emphasizing that their social responsibility
commitment exists irrespective of College-sponsored
or College-initiated events. Most indicated they would
and do participate in organizations or efforts outside of
the College’s purview because they intrinsically
believe that it is the right thing to do for the community.
The faculty, staff, and students’ relationships with
more than 150 nonprofit civic and community-based
organizations are critical markers of Montgomery
College’s social impact footprint, and providing public
space to the community has distinguished the
College as a generous corporate citizen within
Montgomery County. For example, the College has
made its campus facilities available to a variety of
nonprofit community, civic, and business organizations
to host community events and activities. From 2005 to
2008, annually an average of 222 organizations hosted
approximately 6,477 events at the College’s three
campuses, and over 287,000 members of the com-
munity have visited the College’s three campuses to
attend these events.
The Discovery Dialogues and Social Responsibil-
ity Survey findings revealed a wide range of social
responsibility and social impact experiences, activities,
and perspectives at Montgomery College. Some of
the significant findings from the dialogue and survey
questions are highlighted below by specific survey
questions. The highlights include some quotes from
faculty, staff, and students.
Question 1: What does being
socially responsible mean to you?
An overwhelming majority of the faculty, staff, and stu-
dents defined social responsibility simply as the act of
helping others. These participants/respondents either
literally responded with some variant of this phrase
or indirectly indicated it by enumerating the kinds of
charitable organizations with which they volunteer or
to which they contribute. The top five most frequently
submitted responses included “helping others,”
“thinking of and acting for the greater good,” “com-
munity enrichment,” “environmental and ecological
stewardship,” and “personal responsibility.”
Question 2: What inspires you to
participate in socially responsible
activities or to volunteer?
Faculty, staff, and students indicated that intrinsic
inspiration is the primary motivation for participating
in socially responsible activities and volunteering.
Personal satisfaction from contributing to a worthy
cause that betters the community was most often
mentioned as a primary source of inspiration. Again,
the common refrain of “helping others” was the
second most prevalent motivator, followed by
“personal responsibility,” “personal connection or
stake” and finally “religion, faith, or moral conviction.”
The remainder of the responses to this question
enumerated the sweeping range of organizations and
causes that faculty, staff, and students feel strongly
about supporting.

Question 3: How is social
responsibility a part of
Montgomery College’s mission?
There was variability in the faculty, staff, and student
thematic responses to how social responsibility is
part of the College mission. The responses to this
question were both literal and philosophical. The top
philosophical thematic response was “community
enrichment.” In other words, most of the faculty, staff,
and students suggested that social responsibility liter-
ally ties back to the mission statement “Enriching Our
Community.” The remaining key themes include “open
access to education,” “curricular integration,” “provid-
ing education and related services,” “appreciation
for diversity,” and “personal responsibility.” Another
philosophical response was “the very act of offering
open-access to education and training based on a
curriculum that integrates the precepts and practices
of social responsibility is how the mission intersects
with social responsibility.” Educating students—free
of any other extracurricular “adornment”—is in and of
itself socially responsible.
Question 4: How does your
department demonstrate its
commitment to being socially
responsible?
Recycling or other acts of environmental and eco-
logical stewardship were the unit practices that
demonstrated commitment to social responsibility
most frequently mentioned by the faculty, staff, and
students. Although none of the other participant
responses for this dimension indicated significant
commonalities of perspective, the breadth of activities
mentioned in which units are involved is extensive.
When these participant responses were coupled with
the responses to the companion question posed in
the dialogues (In what socially responsible activities
and organizations are you involved?), the number of
organizations that respondents participate in rises
to between 100 and 150. There were also, however,
some faculty and staff who indicated that their units
are not formally doing anything to either embrace or
demonstrate a commitment to social responsibility.
Question 5: In what ways does
Montgomery College educate
students/employees about being
socially responsible?
Faculty, staff, and students indicated that information
about the College’s social impact is communicated in
a variety of ways. The number-one method by which
the College educates its constituencies about social
responsibility is “curricular integration,” as indicated
by respondents (predominantly students for this
sample). This might suggest that the most natural
way for institutions of higher learning to educate
students on the topic of social responsibility is via
the classroom, that is, by organically integrating such
information within the assignments, discussions, and
debates of classroom instruction. Nonstudent par-
ticipants cited “advertisement and promotion” as the
preferred educational method, which included using
print and Web-based media as the main communica-
tions vehicles. The specific use of e-mail and Inside
MC Online were barely mentioned as a means that
the College uses to educate its constituencies about
social responsibility. A commonly expressed perspec-
tive and concern of faculty, staff, and students was
insufficient communication about acknowledgment
of social responsibility at the College, suggesting that
a more formal “informational clearinghouse” function
may be desirable. It was also suggested that since the

College is composed of three campuses with many
constituencies, units, and sub-units, a one-size-fits-all
method of communication might not be very effective.
Question 6: In what ways do
Montgomery College campus and
community partnerships promote
the cause of being socially
responsible?
This question garnered the greatest range of
responses. Most responses suggested that the
faculty, staff, and students were either not aware of or
not sure about the College’s partnerships. More often
than not, the participants simply listed organizations
with which they or the College are involved, which may
or may not constitute formal partnerships. Very few
details or perspective were offered on exactly how
these “partnerships” promote social responsibility.
Critiques and Suggestions for
Improving the Montgomery
College Social Responsibility
Commitment
In addition to answering the questions posed in the
dialogues and surveys, faculty, staff, and students
also offered improvement suggestions, concerns, or
critiques about how the College is approaching or
should approach social responsibility. Some, like the
following faculty members, feel that the practice has
yet to become institutionalized.
“Again, individually, a lot of things may be going on,
but not systematically as an institution. So far, Mont-
gomery College educates us about being socially
responsible by having made it a part of our mission.
The most important indicator of how Montgomery
College educates students and employees about
being socially responsible will be what we do once
officially we are asked to make social responsibility
a part of our strategic planning process, what we do
from then on collegewide—every department, every
unit, every individual.”
A like-minded faculty member went further by
suggesting specific next steps:
“The College needs to go top down with respect to
social responsibility, such as:
• We need more direction from the president
and administration.
• We need to be challenged to get involved in
social responsibility activities.
• We need policy from the top.
• We need administrators to be aware/
promote social responsibility within campus
departments.”

A prevailing question is, how then does one square
these sentiments with the contrasting feedback that
suggests a groundswell of socially responsible activity
is already happening, sans a top-down call to action,
at the institution?
Three elements are likely at work:
• Communication about and acknowledgment of
social responsibility efforts are not well publicized.
• Definitions about what constitutes social respon-
sibility are individually held.
• Many people contribute time, energy, and
resources to causes, organizations, and efforts
outside the College.
As previously mentioned, it is unlikely that a one-size-
fits-all communications vehicle will successfully reach
every constituency at the College and in the commu-
nity. While one department may ultimately be tasked
as the information repository, several communications
channels will need to be used to continually report
on our goals, activities, and outcomes. Messages
will eventually reach mass consumption only through
repetition via the various media and right-sizing the
message (and perhaps even the messenger) for each
individual audience.
Second, the most patently clear generalization that
one can conclude from the Discovery Phase process
and feedback is that the range of definitions given
for social responsibility is diverse. While most agree
that social responsibility generally constitutes helping
others, the actual definitions given by participants for
this phrase range from the intensely personal to the
generic.
The Social Responsibility Internal Advisory Commit-
tee’s Discovery Phase process generated notable
interest and enthusiasm among the members of the
internal College community. There were also frequent
expressions of appreciation for facilitating a process
that invited open dialogue about the College’s social
responsibility activities and social impact. In brief,
there were 12 key findings from the Discovery Dia-
logues, Social Responsibility Survey, and a review of
institutional documents and reports.
1. Although social responsibility language is not in
the current College mission statement, the
College is already engaged in a variety of socially
responsible services and activities.
2. The faculty, staff, students, and several College
units are engaging, both formally and informally,
in a variety of activities and projects with more
than 150 nonprofit civic and community-based
organizations.
3. The full-time faculty are more engaged in volun-
teerism activities and reported more volunteerism
hours per month than any other group surveyed.
4. The words most frequently used by members of
the College community to define social respon-
sibility are “helping others,” “community enrich-
ment,” and “thinking of and acting for the
greater good.”
5. Much of the College’s social responsibility-related
commitments are decentralized.
6. There is no specific College policy for employees
supporting or advocating volunteerism.
7. The faculty and staff participants favor an organi-
zational structure that centralizes, reports, and
assesses the College’s social impacts and social-
ly responsible activities, projects, and programs.

8. There is a wide array of socially responsible activi-
ties and philosophies at the College.
9. Faculty, staff, and students do not confine their
involvement in socially responsible activities to
those organized and hosted solely by the College,
nor do they confine their involvement to formally
organized activities or community-based organi-
zations.
10. Most members of the internal College commu-
nity believe that the College has an obligation to
make a social impact that reaches far beyond the
classroom.
11. Recycling or other acts of environmental and
ecological stewardship are the most commonly
known and cited acts of the College-instituted
socially responsible activities.
12. The College has not broadly targeted com-
munication about its social impact and socially
responsible activities, projects, and programs. As
a result, there is limited individual and collective
knowledge among faculty, staff, and students
about the College’s social impacts or opportuni-
ties for participation in socially responsible activi-
ties and volunteerism.
“Why do I
volunteer?
Because it
is better to
give than to
receive…
”~ Faculty member

Summary and Recommendations
Montgomery College, uniquely positioned within its
communities, is a critical stakeholder in the quality of
life of its surrounding communities. In fact, our stu-
dents, faculty, and staff are members of the College’s
surrounding communities. As a critical stakeholder, the
College has been continuously engaged with the com-
munity through a variety of activities and opportunities.
Some of these activities are sustained, while others are
new. These activities encompass many different forms
including (a) membership in professional, community,
and civic organizations; (b) community outreach and
participation in community organizations through
sponsoring and/or co-sponsoring targeted and general
audience programs; (c) providing public space to the
community for programming; (d) framing and shaping
the community’s perspectives on a variety of local and
national public policy issues; and (e) convening and
hosting occasions for community members to engage
in dialogue about local, regional, and national public
policy–related issues.
Although mostly decentralized, there are several
College offices, units, individuals, programs, projects,
and activities that have a significant social impact
on the community and connect the College with it.
Collectively these offices, units, individuals, programs,
projects, and activities have a local, regional, national,
and global social impact footprint. They also sustain and
create new community connections, collaborations, and
partnerships to address issues for the public good. An
untapped opportunity for Montgomery College is estab-
lishing institutional strategies and processes that enable
the faculty, staff, and students to sustain our social
responsibility momentum and social impact outcomes.
These processes should include institutional systems
that encourage, promote, support, and acknowledge
faculty, staff, and student interest and innovation that
align with the College’s social responsibility and social
impact mission, vision, and agenda.
As a guide, the Social Responsibility Internal Advisory
Committee used the Association of American Colleges
and Universities five social responsibility markers of
campus culture for developing recommendations. The
five markers are (1) mission and educational purpose,
(2) campus life, (3) curriculum and pedagogy, (4) com-
munity and campus partnerships, and (5) incentives and
rewards. The recommendations represent some of the
faculty, staff, and student perspectives on institutional
standards of excellence for sustaining and expanding
the College’s social impact footprint. These recom-
mendations are developed within the broadest context
regarding steps that the College should consider.

Recommendations
1. Mission and Educational Purpose
a. Develop a common understanding of what con-
stitutes social responsibility and the language to
describe it.
b. Include in the College mission statement specific
language about social responsibility and social
impact related to the College’s educational
purpose and mission.
c. Communicate the College social responsibility and
social impact mission in the College catalog.
d. Articulate and address the social responsibility
mission and social impact commitment of the
College in academic, nonacademic, and employ-
ment policies and policy statements/handbooks.
e. Include the College social responsibility and social
impact mission in educational programming/orien-
tation for students, faculty, and staff.
f. Communicate the College social responsibility mis-
sion and social impact as a strategic priority in the
College’s public communications (e.g., Web sites,
public letters, press releases, official publications).
g. Establish quality measures for the comparative
evaluation of unit, faculty, and staff social impact,
volunteerism, and community outreach accom-
plishments.
2. Campus Life
a. Encourage formal campus-based discussions
about what social responsibility, community out-
reach, engagement, service, and service learning
mean among faculty, staff, administrators, and
College/community partners.
b. Encourage campus- and unit-level planning,
resource allocation, assessment, and account-
ability for sustaining social responsibility and
social impact.
c. Encourage faculty and staff to formally document
and report their accomplishments in the areas of
social responsibility, social impact, community
outreach, public policy, and service learning.
d. Establish a communications plan to assist cam-
puses and units in communicating, both internally
and externally, about their social responsibility
and community outreach activities and the social
impact.
e. Build institutional capacity supporting, leading,
integrating, and coordinating social responsibility
activities and sustaining social impact.
f. Create community outreach and volunteer
opportunities where faculty, staff, and students
can coalesce around immediate or long-term
social impact interests or issues.
“Helping out your peers and making
the college campus a great learning
environment...
”~ Student

3. Curriculum and Pedagogy
a. Encourage and support academic units and
faculty by integrating a wide range of intellectual
opportunities, including community-based
learning, social responsibility issues, and practical
social impact activities within the curriculum.
b. Support faculty professional development oppor-
tunities to infuse best practices and pedagogies
related to service learning and social responsibility.
c. Promote faculty inclusion by using the resources
available through the College Center for Teaching
and Learning.
d. Establish faculty support mechanisms for com-
prehensive and sustainable mentoring programs
in areas such as service learning, social responsi-
bility, learning designs, and pedagogy.
e. Encourage the pursuit of curriculum development
grants for faculty in the areas that create com-
munity-based learning opportunities for student
engagement and the development of critical think-
ing skills.
f. Encourage faculty to develop tools to evaluate
and assess curricula-based social responsibility
and social impact activities and outcomes.
4. Community and Campus Partnerships
a. Establish a process to annually collect and more
broadly communicate data on community and
campus partnerships.
b. Create opportunities annually for participatory
evaluation or reflection about community and
campus partnerships.
c. Develop human and institutional talent for estab-
lishing and sustaining community and campus
partnerships.
d. Identify opportunity gaps in the quality and effec-
tiveness of community outreach and community
and campus partnerships.
e. Identify opportunities for creative expansion of
community and campus partnerships that align
with the College mission and educational purpose.
5. Incentives and Rewards
a. Establish a College policy that encourages and
supports employee volunteerism consistent with
the College social impact mission and agenda.
b. Encourage the Office of Human Resources in
collaboration with academic and nonacademic
departments to put into place formal reward
systems that are consistent and clear across the
College.
c. Identify formal and informal ways of rewarding
social responsibility, social impact, community
partnership, and community outreach achieve-
ments, including consideration of these factors
in faculty and staff promotion and annual merit
salary decisions.
d. Formally recognize individual and unit contribu-
tions that advance the institution’s social impact
agenda within the larger community.

Appendix 1
Discovery Dialogues and Survey
As an authentic engagement practice, the Discovery Dialogues
were planned and the survey structured with an understanding
that there is no prevailing self-interest that determines an in-
stitution’s best direction and strategy. Therefore the dialogues
and survey were designed as an inclusive process and based
on the premise that no one individual, institution, or organiza-
tion has all the information or facts about an issue, concern,
or strategy. Fundamental to enhancing the nature of the Mont-
gomery College internal community’s discourse about social
responsibility, the dialogue participants had an opportunity to:
• Share their personal stakes (i.e., self-interest and what is of
value to them) about social responsibility and the College’s
social impact and their preferences for a specific direction or
policy direction
• Discuss the benefits, opportunities, challenges, and con-
sequences of the College’s current approaches to social
responsibility with other members of the College community
• Identify common interests or common directions for sustain-
ing the College’s social impact through social responsibility
activities, projects, and programs
The dialogue and survey process was used to seek under-
standing, create new public knowledge, and explore with
the College community decisions that must be considered
regarding social responsibility and sustaining social impact.
The Committee recognizes that the dialogue and survey par-
ticipants are not representatives of monolithic communities. As
such, the dialogue and survey findings might not be general-
ized for the larger faculty, staff, and student communities.
Dialogue Questions
1. How is social responsibility a part of Montgomery
College’s mission and educational purpose?
2. What does social responsibility mean to you?
3. How do you improve the quality of life for your commu-
nity and beyond?
4. How does your organizational unit demonstrate com-
mitment to social responsibility? (Example: The Rockville
Campus MC Green Student Club and the Facilities Energy
Management unit promote ecological consciousness and
responsibility.)
5. How does Montgomery College educate students about/
for social responsibility?
6. How do campus and community partnerships promote
the cause of social responsibility? (Please share
examples of ways in which MC works with others.)
7. What inspires you to participate in socially responsible
activities?
Survey Questions
1. What does being socially responsible mean to you?
2. What inspires you to participate in socially responsible
activities or to volunteer?
3. How is social responsibility a part of Montgomery
College’s mission?
4. If you are employed at Montgomery College, how
does your department demonstrate its commitment to
being socially responsible? (Example: The Rockville
Campus MC Green Student Club and the Facilities
Energy Management unit within the Office of Facilities
promote ecological consciousness and responsibility.)
5. In what ways does Montgomery College educate
students/employees about being socially responsible?
6. In what ways do Montgomery College campus and
community partnerships promote the cause of being
socially responsible? (Please share examples of ways in
which MC works with others.)

Montgomery College Faculty,
Staff, and Student Socially
Responsible Activities, Projects,
Organizational Affiliations, and
Causes
At Montgomery College, there are several notable examples
of our stewardship and service within Montgomery County,
within the region, and globally. Among the many examples
are Germantown Campus faculty and staff, who are engaged
in projects, activities and scholarship such as the Community
Conversation on Poverty, the Paul Peck Humanities Institute’s
A Lens on Social Justice: Creating Exhibits That Matter, and
Chautauqua. Also more than 100 students are being placed
each semester as volunteers in nonprofit agencies and
schools; and with faculty guidance, students have logged
4,499 Service Learning hours and participate in Alternative
Spring Break projects. Furthermore, the Germantown Campus
has established community partnerships, including informal
partnership agreements with more than 25 nonprofit organiza-
tions and schools.
In collaboration with the City of Rockville, the Rockville
Campus annually hosts the Rockville Science Day. This popular
event includes a plethora of hands-on science demonstrations
and related education programs for the community. Faculty
members are providing academic course instruction at the
Boyds Correctional Facility.
At the Takoma Park/Silver Spring Campus students have
logged more than 5,000 hours of service learning activity. With
the direction and guidance of the campus faculty and staff,
these students volunteer in nursing homes, homeless shelters,
food kitchens, courtrooms, community centers, recreation
programs, tutoring centers, housing programs, middle schools
and high schools, and environmental clean-up efforts.
The College’s science, engineering, and math (SEM) faculty
members are teaching introductory engineering classes at
local high schools in collaboration with Project Lead the Way, a
national outreach program to stimulate interest in engineering
studies and the profession. The ACCESS Engineering S-STEM
Program, a partnership between the College and the National
Science Foundation, supports promising engineering students
who need financial help to pursue their studies.
The Montgomery College Office of Facilities executes all of the
College’s environmentally sensitive programs and processes,
from recycling 63% of the College’s waste stream to designing
a new science building that will be LEED (Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design) Gold certified. We are
saving the earth!
The following is an alphabetical listing of some of the Montgom-
ery College faculty, staff, and student socially responsible activi-
ties, projects, organizational affiliations, and causes. This list
represents some of the critical linking, connecting, and partner-
ing by our internal College community members with external
communities that are making a significant social impact.
AARP
ACCESS Engineering S-STEM Program
ACT-SO
Advocate
African Immigrant and Refugee Foundation
American Association for Affirmative Action
American Red Cross
American Volkssport Association
AmeriCorps VISTA
Amnesty International
Arab American Heritage Week
Arts Institute
Avaaz.org
Biomedical Scholars Program
Board of Elections
Boy Scouts of America
Boys and Girls Club
Boys to Men
Brownies (Girl Scouts of America)
Chautauqua Festival
Chesapeake Bay Foundation
Child and Adolescent Center
Christmas Angel Program
College Institute
Combat2College Program
Combat2College Lecture and Discussions
Conflict Resolution of Montgomery County
Congress-Bundestag Youth Exchange Program
Cub Scouts (Boy Scouts of America)
Department of Recreation HOC
Diabetes University
Diversity Leadership Workshop
Diversity Roundtable
Earth Day
Education at Risk Community Dialogues
Ejobs
Emergency Book Fund
English for the American Workplace
F. Scott Fitzgerald Literary Conference
Appendix 2

Appendix 2 (continued)
Federal Work-Study Program
First Year Experience Program
Future Link
GapBuster Learning Center, Inc.
Gateway Program
Gateway to the Arts
Get Involved Day
Getting Beyond the System®
Seminar
Global Peace and Justice Community
Globe Hall Congress
Good Shepherd Lutheran Church
Grad Finale Fair
Green MC Program
Habitat for Humanity
Holocaust Commemoration
Holy Cross Hospital Clinic
How to Succeed in College Program
Impact Silver Spring
Inside MC Online
Institute for Global and Cultural Studies
International Student Exhibit
Jefferson Café
Kiwanis Club
Latino Health Initiative
Learning College Retreat
Lions Club
Literacy Council of Montgomery County
Macklin Business Institute
Manna Food Center
Marriott Hospitality Center
Maryland Community College Diversity Roundtable
MBA without Borders
MC Wellness
Montgomery County Public Schools
Military Day
Mobile Class Rooms
Montgomery College Commencement
Montgomery County Business and Professional Women
Montgomery County Coalition for Adult English Literacy
Montgomery County Commission for Women’s Legislative
Briefing Planning Committee
Montgomery County Council
Montgomery County Diversity Council
Montgomery County Emergency Management Group
Montgomery County Incubators
Montgomery County Office of Emergency Management and
Homeland Security
Montgomery County Volunteer Fire Fighter
The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy
National Institutes of Health Children’s Cancer Center
NET Program
Nursing Club
Office of Community Partnerships
One Maryland One Book Initiative
Operation Migration and International Crane Foundation
Paul Peck Institute for the Humanities
Planetarium Program
Pre-K Through 20 Council
Prince George’s Resource Center
Professional Week
Project Fair Vote
Project LEAD
Project Portal to Success in Engineering
Project Success
Race for the Cure
Refugee Center
Relay for Life
Rockville City Council
Rockville Expansion Task Force
Rockville Scholarship Foundation
Rockville Science Day
Rotary Club
Salvation Army
Sandy Spring Museum
Scarves for Seniors
School-Community Partnership Conference
Science Day Fair
Seneca Valley Sugarloafers Volksmarch Club
Senior Moment
Smithsonian Fellowships
SOARS
Sonya Kovalevsky Day
Spinal Cord Injury Network of Metro Washington
Spring Quest
St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital
Staff Senate
STAR Program
Student Ambassadors Club
Student Government
Student Leadership Summit
Student Life Information Day
Student Senate
Taproot Foundation
Transfer Day
Transitional Advisory Group
TRIO
United Way
U.S. Department of Energy Science Bowl
U.S. Geological Survey Whooping Crane Restoration Project
U.S. Wounded Soldiers Foundation
V-Day Initiative
Volunteer Day
Washington Regional Taskforce Against Campus Prejudice
Women’s Studies Program
Words, Beats, and Life, Inc.

Appendix 3
Figure 1: Participant Responses by Status
The Participant Responses by Status data provide a disaggregated constituent view of the Social Responsibility Survey respon-
dents (i.e., administrator, staff, student, and faculty). Interest was keen as 1,102 respondents answered the call for feedback. The
student participant voices dominated the sample (43%), but faculty and staff also enthusiastically participated at 27% and 26% of
the sample, respectively. The faculty and staff samples represented nearly a quarter of all the College’s faculty and staff.
Figure 2: Participant Responses by Gender
The Participant Responses by Gender data indicate that the Social Responsibility Survey female participant feedback was pro-
vided at a rate twice that of males.
Figure 3: Participant Responses by Appointment
The Participant Appointment data indicate whether the Social Responsibility Survey respondent is a full- or part-time employee or
student. All of the survey respondents, however, did not indicate an appointment status. Of those respondents who did provide this
information, participation by full-time employees and students was greater than that of part-time employees and students by a margin
of five to one.

Figure 5: Participant Responses by Number of Volunteer Hours
The Participant Responses by Number of Volunteer Hours data on the Social Responsibility Survey indicate the number of hours
per month that staff and students engage in volunteer activities. The number of volunteer hours per month data was reported in three
categories: (a) none, (b) 1–8 hours per month, and (c) more than 8 hours per month.
More than 50% of the survey respondents indicated that they do not volunteer time on a monthly basis. This data, however, should
not be interpreted as disinterest or dispassion for volunteerism or social responsibility. The survey data suggested that the College’s
full-time faculty are more engaged in volunteerism activities and reported more volunteerism hours per month than any other groups
surveyed.
The overall survey data indicated that the employees and students are engaged in socially responsible and volunteer activities with
more than 150 community and civic organizations. Frequently dialogue participants and survey respondents suggested that they
did not necessarily consider their personal and professional affiliations and relationships with civic and community organizations as
volunteerism. The dialogue and survey data also indicated that many members of the College community find other ways to
contribute to civic and community organizations (e.g., donating money, assets, or facilities). The demographic composition of the
360 survey respondents who volunteer 1–8 hours a month is as follows:
• 39% are faculty
• 29% are students
• 26% are staff
• 71% are women
• 83% are full time
The demographic composition of
the 158 survey respondents who
volunteer more than 8 hours a month
is as follows:
• 35% are faculty
• 32% are students
• 71% are women
• 82% are full-time
Appendix 3 (continued)
Figure 4: Participant Responses by Campus
The Participant Responses by Campus data identify the aggregated number of employees and students by campus that
responded to the Social Responsibility Survey.

www.montgomerycollege.edu
240-567-5000
An academic institution committed to promoting equal opportunity
and fostering diversity among its students, faculty, and staff

2010 Social Responsibility Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (18)

Similar to 2010 Social Responsibility Report

Similar to 2010 Social Responsibility Report (20)

2010 Social Responsibility Report