Learner Log Book


The purpose on the Learner's Log Book (LLB) is to document the achievements of the learner in a central repository that will be considered as evidence on the effectiveness of the learning process. It is a 'monitoring tool' that e-tutors use to report on individual learners' progress and it is a way of ensuring that learners:

  • Are engaged in their learning process.
  • They are experimenting by doing the tasks subscribed to them by the e-tutor.
  • Avoid plagiarism because learners have to be engaged on a continuous basis and the informal assessment can therefore be used to ensure consistency with the main formal assessment.
  • Provide e-Tutors with the opportunity to get to know the learners evaluate them and mentor them properly.
  • There are templates which will reflect whether learners read, whether they understand, whether they assimilate the knowledge, whether they develop enquiry ability, whether they have the potential to conduct critical thinking and whether they can reflect on the knowledge accumulated by relating to real situations.


The onus is mainly on learners to furnish the required information in the templates after each unit based on the Read and Analyze Activity. After filling the information in the template they need to e-mail it back to the e-Tutor.

e-Tutor will then comments on the work done and the involvement that takes place and give overall impressions on the learners at the end of the module.


2..SUMMARY (100-200 words)

The authors of this paper, Meehan, Meehan and Richards, are here attempting to bridge what they perceive to be a gap between a company’s policies on Corporate Social Responsibility and their ethical implications to the more aware consumers to help further achieve and increase the company’s profitability projections while at the same instance achieving their overall social objectives.  They propose to do this by offering a next generation model for Corporate Responsibility (CR) which they refer to as 3C-SR.  They hope that this new model will assist managers in the use of guidelines and procedures that will help equate the social objectives of their department and company with the “growing numbers of ethically aware consumers,” that now inhabit the marketplace.  The 3C-SR model does this by not only addressing the strategy and operations of the company itself, but also the marketplace to create a unified front and complete business stratagem. They begin with the assumption that mot researchers have not included satisfactory conceptual resources to assist managers in integrating the myriad aspect of CR into their corporate strategies and operations.  They begin by an analysis of the literature to support their assertion of these inadequacies.  They develop and explain their 3C-SR model and the offer guidelines in applying that model to the manager’s application of the policies and procedures.


  • The term corporate social responsibility has been used in so many different contexts that it has lost all meaning and is simply political-speak
  •   The “corporate social performance” (CSP) model, is a conceptual attempting to allow academics to locate CSR concepts in a broader framework. The CSP focuses attention on outcomes.
  • Corporate citizenship is a new concept. viewed as the latest catchall term to cover business-society relations
  •  3C-SR model: competitive advantage through social resources.  CR can be viewed as a “competitive resource and habituated to the normal processes of strategy development and measurement that are so well embedded in many leading organizations.”
    • Social resources are made up of three inter-related components (the 3 C’s of 3C-SR):
      • ethical and social Commitments;
        • ethical standards and social objectives in the company’s mission statement, strategic objectives, strategy programs,  policies and culture
      • Connections with partners in the value network
        • A stakeholder approach to ensure mutuality of interests and uniform commitment to shared values across the network.
      • Consistency of behavior over time to build trust.
        • behavioral element of social resources over time and across all facets of an organizations operation.
  • From social resources to competitive strategy
    •  A positive corporate image translates to increased sales as more and more aware consumers are predisposed to purchase from the organization.


  • This entire paper is directly related to CSR and the improvement of intercompany communication regarding such.
  • Early models of CSR (CSR1 and, when “responsiveness” is emphasized, CSR2) are normative and descriptive in nature and fail to provide any tools or guidance for managers
  •  Corporate social responsibilities principally operate at three levels; institutional, organizational and individual.
  • The authors view CR as a road to business success rather than an unnecessary drain on resources.
  • The concept of “social resources” suggest a model that integrates all the previous perspectives on CR into a strategy to implement a CC orientation.
  • Three “Cs” of C3-SR is the foundation for building competitive strategies around social resources. Ethical
  • Ethical concerns are becoming mainstream in an increasing range of markets.
  • Companies failing to recognise this will fall victim to equally significant restructuring of competitive positions within their own industries.


While the authors raise some very valid points and certainly posit an interesting argument regarding better approaches to applying corporate responsibility, their literature review is slightly lacking in supporting research and analysis for their C3-SR proposition.  The literature review goes over the many reason why past analysis of Corporate Responsibility is lacking in implementation and how the term itself have become a panacea of sorts that is used for political correctness.  However, they fail to support their own hypothesis with either established literature or other research verification that would support a change of tactic regarding implementation or understanding.

One must take into consideration the fact that this is merely a conceptual paper and not a full blown research analysis, but there is a certain need for support regarding the positive aspects of their proposal.  An element which should have been further explored is the concept of the Triple Bottom Line that has been a tool in place for several decades now and is in direct relation to the support of their C3-SR concept.  They do mention it in several places:

“This latter revision updates the model to correspond more closely to contemporary notions of CSR as integral to (rather than imposed upon)

the business system and exemplified in concepts such as the triple bottom line and social auditing.” (p. 388)

“…external “Responsibility Assurance Systems,” using globally accepted principles endorsed by credible organizations to produce externally verifiable triple bottom line accounts.” (p. 391)

“In this way CR becomes a means to, rather than drain on, business success (measured in terms of the triple bottom line). (p. 391)

Unfortunately they only refer to it rather than apply the concept more concretely to their own ideology regarding the C3-SR modality.

The Authors do present a compelling argument for their 3 C’s concept as is illustrated by the following figure:

Figure 1:  The 3C-SR model (p. 392)

Here we see the problem clearly explained and the explanation clearly stated in the center of the concentric circles.  However, their argument falls short on research.  They do cite several companies but only in so far as to show the negative aspect again.  Wal-Mart for, “..the company has been heavily criticized for its failure to embrace more socially acceptable labour practices.” (p. 394) and the GAP:

“GAP Inc’s persistent exclusion of trade union recognition (i.e. recorded as “Not reported” in its 2004 CSR Report), from its social performance audits, suggests an instrumentalism to GAPs approach: wanting to reduce the damage to its reputation without fundamentally changing its labour relations economically.”

Here we see the negative presented, but there is little in the way of proving that better social responsibility actually equals greater profit.  Also by not balancing this with adequate triple bottom line analysis, weighing all the variable, little was proven towards the authors position that increased social responsibility automatically equality increase organizational sustainability.


While negative criticism of current research models and company practices runs high in this paper, it is not without merit and does show that companies are facing a crisis if they think their only concern is with economic value instead of the triple bottom line of economics, social and environmental responsibility.  The authors are correct that with the massive amounts of information available to consumers, they may be more cautious when spending their funds on non-social conscious organizations. It is true that it must be much more than just lip service and must have practical and understandable applications with the company’s infrastructure.

Companies that choose to incorporate A CSR model of organization will certainly reap sustainable benefits in the long run.  The initial inception of such models often requires a great deal of time and capital investment which may at first seem economically unproductive.  However, over the course of time these models create future sustainability and increase a confident consumer base.


It was quite interesting to explore the nuances of this paper and to understand that there are many levels of academic research from simple concept papers to full blown research article that do their own experimentation and survey analysis.  Here I also discovered that it is important not to take a face value what is being said but to weigh the argument against the way the research is structured.  Here was presented a largely negative view trying to prove that social responsibility is better, but in fact very little was presented to prove that point in the affirmative.  I also feel that my analytical abilities have improved greatly by taking the counter position in my mind of a company executive reviewing this plan and finding tis shortcoming as well as it beneficial merits.

Let's make that grade!