Much of this paper is a summary statement, and as such it embodies a considerable range of literature of varying degrees of specificity. In the references I have mostly settled for those sources dealing with the general ideas.
2.
TownsendP.. (1975), Sociology and Social Policy, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Chapter I in particular provides a valuable discussion of the relationship between the objectives of a Welfare State, the problems of translating policy into plan and the role of the social scientist in seeking to provide a means by which the extent to which official social objectives are being achieved may be assessed.
3.
YoungM.. (1958), The Rise of the Meritocracy, Harmondsworth: Penguin. For an elaborated and amusing discussion of the concept and its development.
4.
HalseyA. H., HeathA. F., and RidgeJ. M.. (1980), Origins and Destinations: Family, Class and Education in Modern Britain, Oxford: Clarendon Press, chapter 9.
5.
HalseyA. H.. (1974), in WedderburnD.. (ed.), Poverty, Inequality and Class Structure, Cambridge University Press.
6.
HalseyA. H., FloudJ., and AndersonA. C.. (1965), Education Economy and Society. Much analysis has dwelt upon the attainment of equality objectives rather than upon those of economic efficiency. In their introduction Halsey and Floud strongly relate the two. The methodologies available to us for measuring the impact of schooling have not so far indicated that it even affects attainment overall once family background and measured ability are taken into account.
7.
AinsworthM. E., and BattenE. J.. (1974), The Effects of Environmental Factors on Secondary Educational Attainment in Manchester: a Plowden Follow-up.Schools Council Research Studies: London: Macmillan.
8.
BattenE. J.. (1975), in RushtonJ., and TurnerJ.. (eds.), Education and Deprivation, Manchester University Press, ch. 3.
9.
GlennersterH.. (1972), in TownsendM., and BosanquetR.. (eds.), Labour and Inequality, Fabian Press, ‘Education and inequality’.
DaweA.. (1970), ‘The two sociologies’,British Journal of Sociology, V, 21. Describes the concepts of order and control as the bases of the dominant characteristics of sociological perspectives. It seems to me that these notions are useful when considering the traditional curriculum and its management, as opposed to a community education curriculum with an emphasis upon knowledge as process rather than fact. These ideas are partly worked out in an unpublished paper, ‘Community education—ideas and issues’.
12.
LeesR., and SmithG.. (1975), in Action—Research in Community Development, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, chapter 20.
13.
BattenE. J.. (1980), ‘Community education and ideology’, in FletcherC., and ThompsonN.. (eds.), Issues in Community Education, Falmer Press. For some discussion of disinterestedness and bureaucracy as well as the context of the received knowledge curriculum.
14.
TitmussR. M.. (1958), ‘Social administration in a changing society’ and ‘The irresponsible society’, in Essays on the Welfare State.London: Allen & Unwin.
15.
Le GrandJ.. (1982), The Strategy of Equality: Redistribution and the SocialServices. London: Allen & Unwin.