Jumat, 10 April 2009

community work

The term community work has a relatively short history in the United Kingdom. Nonetheless, the number of full-time practitioners who were described as being engaged in community work by the early 1980s was roughly equivalent to youth work or adult education. Then there appeared to be some 5,365 community workers, 60 per cent of which were employed in the voluntary sector (Francis, Henderson and Thomas 1984). Since then there has been no substantial survey of community workers - and there have also been fundamental changes in the economic and institutional context in which they operate.

In this piece we explore: the emergence of community work in the UK; the impact of anti-poverty initiatives such as the Community Development Project in the late 1960s and early 1970s; the shape of work in the 1980s - here focusing upon the categorisation and definition of community work advanced by David Thomas in his book The Making of Community Work (1983) (also of special importance here is Barr's (1991) study of community work practice in Strathclyde); and the state of practice in the 1990s and at the turn of the century.
The emergence of community work

In the late 1950s and early 1960s accounts of practice and theoretical explorations began to appear that viewed community workers as a distinct occupation. Prior to this there were separate groups of workers such as community centre wardens, secretaries of councils of social services and development workers on new housing estates, who did not possess a common occupational identity. As Thomas (1983: 25) has argued, the main orientation was to the educational. Not unexpectedly - given the process-focus of many of the key figures, and the institutional location of much of the funding and work. The Younghusband Report (1959) on social work was a significant turning point. It specifically drew on the North American division of social work into casework, group work and community organization, describing the latter as:

primarily aimed at helping people within a local community to identify social needs, to consider the most effective ways of meeting these and to set about doing so, in so far as their available resources permit.

The first major collection of material (Kuenstler 1961) took up the notion of ‘community organization’, but it was the terms ‘community development’ and ‘community work’ that became popular - and tended to merge. The term 'community development' was adopted by many U.K. workers and projects for work that focused on work with local neighbourhood groups to set and meet their own needs. The changes were symbolized in two initiatives - the setting up a study group by the Gulbenkian Foundation in 1966 (the first report appeared in 1968) to look at the nature and future of community work in the UK; and the development of the Community Development Projects by the Home Office as part of an anti-poverty strategy. We will look at both in turn.
The Gulbenkian Report: Community Work and Social Change

The Gulbenkian Report was actually focused around training but inevitably spread its net much wider. Community work was taken to include:

helping local people to decide, plan and take action to meet their own needs with the help of available outside resources;

helping local services to become more effective, usable and accessible to those whose needs they are trying to meet;

taking account of the interrelation between different services in planning for people;

forecasting necessary adaptions to meet new social needs in constantly changing circumstances (Gulbenkian 1968: 149).

From this the committee concluded that community work had in it aspects of direct neighbourhood work, closer relations between services and people, inter-agency coordination, and planning and policy formulation. In a crucial section they argued:

This community work function should be a recognised part of the professional practice of teachers, social workers, the clergy, health workers, architects, planners, administrators and others. In the modern conditions of social change it is also a necessary full time professional task. (ibid: 149)

The educationalists on the committee had argued for the conceptualization of community work as part of education - especially adult education. Their case rested on a belief that as an intervention it was fundamentally an educational or learning process, in fulfilment of which the use of specialist community workers was only one strategy (Thomas 1983: 29). Thus, the advancement of specialist workers - and the emphasis on the role of workers in making services more effective, and in planning, signalled a significant movement away from the educational position. Further, this report needs to be considered in conjunction with other shifts, especially in social work with the move to generic workers recommended by the Seebohm Report (HMSO 1968). There did appear to be a possibility that community work might become a key element of social work (mirroring the three strands of practice in the North American literature - casework, groupwork and community organization). Thomas argues that:

The most profound effect of the demise of the educational influence was that the process goals of community work were not developed beyond the rudimentary expression they were given in the texts of the 1950s and 1960s... The educational aspects of intervention... have remained rooted in two narrow orthodoxies... The first... was that process goals became associated in the minds of the new practitioners of the 1970s only with changes in individual or personal development. The second orthodoxy was to identify process goals with the rhetoric of 'raising political consciousness'... The educational goals of community work embrace both these... but they are also much wider. (Thomas 1983: 31)

The opportunity was also lost of developing community work within community centres and the definition of community work continued to be tied to the particular issues of the day (ibid: 32).

In Scotland, the position was a little different. Following the Alexander Report (SED 1975) and the establishment of a new local government structure community education services were formed in most regions. While a considerable amount of community work remained in social service departments in a number of regions (see the later reading by Barr 1991 concerning Strathclyde), there has been a significant lobby for community development within community education (PCEO 1992). Significantly, bearing in mind our earlier comments concerning community associations, the linking of adult education with youth and community work, has meant that the educative core of community development has been asserted.

The process is educational. It is about people in communities creating opportunities for growth and change and deliberate movement towards the ends which they determine and in process of doing so increase their critical awareness, knowledge, skills and attitudes. (PCEO 1992: 7)

The Community Development Projects

During the 1960s and early 1970s there was a growing recognition of the extent to which poverty remained a major feature of UK society (see, for example, Coates and Silburn 1970). There had also been a fairly substantial series of debates around the significance and importance of people's participation in various aspects of government activity - perhaps the best known being the Skeffington Report on planning (MHLG 1969). Following the efforts of the Democratic administration in the United States of America to wage a 'War on Poverty', the UK government sought a similar, but cheaper, initiative. Self-help and resident participation were seen to be possibilities for the improvement of inner city situations.

The result, in 1969, was the launch of the Community Development Projects programme. It was the largest action-research project ever funded by government. The avowed intention was to gather information about the impact of existing social policies and services and to encourage innovation and co-ordination. The projects had a strong and explicit research focus and an emphasis on social action 'as a means of creating more responsive local services and of encouraging self help' (Loney 1983: 3). The projects were initially based in 12 areas of social deprivation. These were neighbourhoods of 3,000 to 15,000 people. Each project involved a small group of professional workers and researchers. The emphasis in CDPs on research meant that they produced a range of important material both about the nature of community work and about the social, political and economic condition of particular areas (full listing in Loney 1983).

Workers in many of the projects came to reject the analysis and strategies of the original project proposals. They sought to organise and research around larger questions of inequality and deindustrialisation rather than more localized concerns around community organization. There was often a desire to bring about a much stronger link between the struggles of the workplace and those of the neighbourhood and community; and to develop means by which groups can join together in things like federations to better influence decision making on a city-wide, regional and national basis. As Loney (1983: 23) comments, the community workers who entered the field in the late 1960s and early 1970s frequently rejected the traditional (educational) models of community work. They replaced the process-orientated 'non-directiveness of Batten and Batten (1967) with a commitment to organizing and a readiness to take up oppositional positions (Baldock 1977). By 1974 the Home Office had largely given up on the projects and they were wound up in 1976.

In some respects, the optimism and enthusiasm with which community work and 'participation' were greeted in the early 1970s and late 1960s waned with the realisation that many of the issues the work sought to confront were not resolvable at the local level - a realisation that was underlined by the widespread public expenditure cuts after the oil crisis of 1974. There was a considerable growth in the political awareness of community workers in the mid to late 1970s and this has been reflected in the adoption by workers of very different ideological stances. This is sometimes represented by the contrasting of so called social work or community development traditions of practice, with political action traditions:

The former focused on the community as a social unit or organism, and was concerned with so called 'soft' issues such as social disorganisation and the need to build up networks and resources. The 'political action tradition' identified the community as a political unit, and emphasised 'hard' issues such as oppression and powerlessness. People associated themselves with each tradition, and each was thought to have its own particular organising styles and methods ('consensual' and 'conflict'). (Thomas 1983: 93)

Three further dynamics were also at work: a more general movement away from associational and community group activity (perhaps best articulated in more recent years in the work of Robert Putnam); the rise of managerialism; and the coming to power of politicians who stressed market solutions. All can be seen in developments during the 1980s.
Community work in the 1980s - service extension

In the early 1980s another report sponsored by the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation (and written by David Thomas) suggested that community work had three major aspects:

First, to help people take action on specific issues of importance to them. These issues will almost invariably involve the influence of resources, either those held, for example, by local authorities, or to be found within communities themselves. I have referred to this as the distributive aspect of community work. It is equivalent to the conventional category of 'product goals' familiar in community work literature. Influence on the distribution of resources will be terminal goals for the people involved, but I have argued that we should see them also as instrumental in contributing towards:

secondly, the development of political responsibility; and

thirdly, that of communal coherence. (Thomas 1983: 102)

David N. Thomas: Approaches in community work

Thomas (1993) isolated five main strands or approaches in his study of community work in the early 1980s:

Community Action focuses on the organisation of those adversely affected by the decisions, or non-decisions, of public and private bodies and by more general structural characteristics of society. The strategy aims to promote collective action to challenge existing socio-political and economic structures and processes, to explore and explain the power realities of people's situations and, through this twin pronged approach, develop both critical perspectives of the status quo and alternative bases of power and action.

Community Development emphasises self-help, mutual support, the building up of neighbourhood integration, the development of neighbourhood capacities for problem-solving and self-representation, and the promotion of collective action to bring a community's preferences to the attention of political decision-makers.

Social Planning is concerned with the assessment of community needs and problems and the systematic planning of strategies for meeting them. Social planning comprises the analysis of social conditions, social policies and agency services; the setting of goals and priorities; the design of service programmes and the mobilisation of appropriate resources; and the implementation and evaluation of services and programmes.

Community Organisation involves the collaboration of separate community or welfare agencies with or without the additional participation of statutory authorities, in the promotion of joint initiatives.

Service Extension is a strategy which seeks to extend agency operations and services by making them more relevant and accessible. This includes extending services into the community, giving these services and the staff who are responsible for them a physical presence in a neighbourhood. (Thomas 1983: 106-139)

In a sense these five approaches are far broader than 'community work' - especially the last, service extension. As Thomas argues:

The correct relationship is that community work is a contribution to each of these approaches and, perhaps more importantly, we need to be aware of the range of other contributions that are possible and desirable, and whose value may have been obscured by the attention given to community work. (Thomas 1983: 107)

Here, especially, we need to consider youth work, adult education, planning, public health and social work. Social workers, in particular following the Barclay Report (NISW 1982) and the emphasis on community care began to explore the potential of 'community-based' approaches.

The nature of community work had shifted. While some workers still had the freedom, and were disposed, to encourage opposition to the social and economic policies of the Conservative government in Britain - and their impact on local communities (especially with regard to the closure of heavy industries, engineering works and mines upon local communities); the context in which many were employed had changed. The language of managerialism had spread through many local authorities recasting much of the work in terms of meeting organizational objectives rather than local community needs. Most particularly, the focus was upon the more effective use of resources and the efficiency of services - especially with regard to housing and care. There was a significant shift away from locating workers in local neighbourhoods in order to sustain and develop local groups and associational life.

In many respects we have a clearer picture of local activity in Scotland than in England from this time. This is largely due to Alan Barr's (1991) detailed account of practice in Strathclyde. He brought out a number of significant elements. However, two things in particular stand out. The first is the emphasis on community development and process that the workers studied still had (in contrast with the context in which they were working). This may flow, in part, from the particular cultural, political and social situation in Scotland and the focus that community education provides. That said, the work was located in a social work department; and it is likely that a number of community workers in other parts of the UK would have assented to these concerns at this time. The second, and endearing, feature of this research is that it brings out a great deal of the routine day-to-day activities that go to make up jobs such as ours. One of the significant features here is the relatively low amount of face-to-face work undertaken by senior workers as compared to their assistants.
Community work in the 1990s - economic development, community practice and capacity building

By the early 1990s the position of community development work had become a little battered and activity was reduced (Popple 1995: 30). The squeeze on public expenditure; moves to curtail the activities of local authorities (and even to abolish some - such as the Greater London Council); continued high levels of unemployment and poverty; and movements into community care had all acted to alter the face of the work. As Butcher (1992) argued at the beginning of the decade, ‘community work’ was going through considerable change and redefinition.

By the mid-1990s it was clear that community work approaches were being further harnessed to the development of centrally planned initiatives such as community care; and have become less the province of the traditional concerns of community organization and development. Where people have been able to hang on to some of these concerns - as perhaps has been the case in a number of the rural community initiatives (see Francis and Henderson 1992) - the emphasis was arguably less on fostering democracy than on facilitating enterprise, holding onto local services such as post offices and pubs, and on developing social provision such as housing. There has also been a flurry of interest in rural work (Francis and Henderson 1992; Henderson and Francis 1993) and in children’s work (Henderson 1995; Cannan and Warren 1997).

Instead of looking to community work as an organizing idea, a number of people started to talk of community practice (and this is certainly reflected in the North American literature - see, for example, Hardcastle and Powers 2004). In other words, various areas of work can be seen to have a 'community dimension' and that we need to do is look at the ways in which ideas of 'community' permeate public and social policies and can be used to create alternatives (Butcher et al 1993).

A further shift in the rhetoric of community development emerged in the mid-1990’s with the turn to ‘capacity building’. Skinner (1997: 1-2) defines capacity building as follows:

Development work that strengthens the ability of community organizations and groups to build their structures, systems, people and skills so that they are better able to define and achieve their objectives and engage in consultation and planning, manage community projects and take part in partnerships and community enterprises.

It includes aspects of training, organizational and personal development and resource building, organized in a planned and self-conscious manner, reflecting the principles of empowerment and equality.

The language and direction of ‘capacity-building’ fitted in with moves toward a greater concern with economic development and planning - although a number of those interested in promoting (such as Eade 1997) are aware of some of its limitations. It was deeply inscribed with a technicist orientation - and was a long way from the more radical concerns of community workers in the early 1970s.

The radical tradition has kept alive (in the literature at least - see the material on community participation in particular). Cooke and Shaw (1997) argued for the re-etablishment of the value of and direction of radical community work - but freedom of movement remained limited for many practitioners - and much of the writing remained caught up in the theoretical concerns of the early 1970s (the ‘class of 68’ as Cooke describes it).
Community work today

State-sponsored community work remains largely locked into the mix of care, economic development and service delivery improvement work that developed during the 1980s and 1990s. However, three particular areas of state-sponsored work did, to some limited extent, bring a stronger emphasis upon community-based organization and group-functioning in England. First, the emergence and growth of tenant management organizations has led to some attention being given to the cultivation of local groups and the deepening of their capacity to develop and run their own organizations. However, this has not been without tensions (ODPM 2002). In particular local authorities have tended to see tenant management organizations as extensions of their management activity whilst those involved are more likely to see themselves as community activists. They have also tended to see them as rivals. The result was that those employed to facilitate the development of tenant's management organizations and cooperatives often slipped into either representing the view or policies of the local authority to the group or advising them on the technicalities of housing finance funding. The enhancement of local group life was commonly sidelined into a series of courses on 'how to chair a committee' and such like.

Second, the New Deal for Communities Programme in England - part of the government's strategy to 'tackle multiple disadvantage in the most deprived neighbourhoods' - has involved an emphasis upon local community involvement. (New Deal for Communities was established in 1998 and expanded in 1999 to include some 39 partnerships and involving a spend of some £2bn). However, results from the interim evaluation of the initiative indicate that there is only patchy evidence of increased participation in local networks, neighbourliness and involvement in local groups. In contrast, there does appear to have been a significant increase in the trust invested by local residents in local institutions. As the evaluators stressed, community involvement and engagement takes time (Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research 2005: 67).

Third, the Sure Start programme, originally announced in 1998 and aimed at increasing the quality and availability of child care in selected areas in England, improving the health and well-being of children, and providing support for parents initially involved a significant emphasis upon community development and involvement. Some interesting and apparently successful locally-based work emerged. A strong case was made for this by Norman Glass and others involved in the development of the programme on the grounds that:

... it was necessary, in the case of early years at any rate, to involve local people fully in the development and management of the programme if it was to take root and not simply be seen as another quick fix by middle-class social engineers. "What works" is important, but "how it works", at least in this policy area, is equally, if not more, important. (Glass 2005)

If people 'owned' programmes it was argued, then they would both be more likely to address relevant needs and to engage people. However, the community development orientation also contributed to the effective abolition of the programme.

Community development takes time. Disadvantaged communities have to be persuaded to participate, and their natural suspicion leads them to hang back until there is something to show. So the "local" Sure Start programmes (as the DfES took to referring to them) have always been behind schedule, and - a mortal sin under New Labour - underspent. (Glass 2005)

The governments desire to rapidly extend the programme as part of a larger strategy around child care and parenting involved the establishment of large numbers of children's centres within what was termed a 'children's trust approach' and the development of interdisciplinary professional teams. The patient, and it was argued, ultimately rewarding business of community development and full participation did not fit in with such a model.

The main carrier of a concern to cultivate community coherence and local group life in England and Wales at least, were churches and religious groups. The numbers of youth workers employed by local churches had increased significantly during the 1990s and alongside it there had also been a noticeable emphasis placed upon community development. In part this was linked to the need to encourage better use of church buildings and facilities - but there was also a strong theological argument for attention to community life beyond that of the church. A number of Methodist churches, for example, used a community centre model around which to base their activities. Within, and associated with, mosques there developed a significant range of welfare and other networks and services.

In Scotland, the picture was a little different. The community education tradition remained reasonable strong and vocal - adopting, in significant part, the language of community learning. In a Scottish Executive paper this was defined as 'informal learning and social development work with individuals and groups in their communities. The aim of this work is to strengthen communities by improving people's knowledge, skills and confidence, organisational ability and resources'. The paper continued, 'Community learning and development makes an important contribution towards promoting lifelong learning, social inclusion and active citizenship' (Scottish Executive 2003). There is a real sense in which the educational role of community development had not been lost (as was the case in England in the 1960s and 1970s) (see Tett 2006).

One further important element came into play in terms of debates about policy - social capital. Significant press attention was given to Putnam's arguments around the diminution of social capital in the USA (and the impact this had upon people's health, education and happiness). It also encouraged some important debates within academic and policy circles (see lifelong learning and social capital). While there has been some exploration of what a concern with deepening social capital might mean in terms of work in communities (see, for example, Putnam and Feldstein with Cohen 2003) it has been, on the whole, rather disappointing. Part of the problem is that it entails policymakers and practitioners entertaining and making sense of issues within a markedly different frame of reference than that which dominates discussion and policy today. The work involved is long-term, dependent upon process and concerned more broadly with flourishing and happiness.
Further reading and references

I have tried to select texts that illustrate the development of the work and contemporary debates. For ease material is themed: the development of community work; principles and practice texts; and aspects of practice.
The development of community work

In this section I have listed some landmark books and reports, plus some histories and overviews.

Batten, T. R. (1957) Communities and their Development. An introductory study with special reference to the Tropics, London: Oxford University Press. Chapters on: Trends in community development; Agencies and communities; Some principles of agency work; Directing change; Aiding community projects; Projects in disorganized communities; Building community; The school and the community; Making people literate; Introducing new ideas; Working with groups; Selecting and training the worker; Making communities better.

Batten, T. R. and Batten M. (1967) The Non-Directive Approach in Group and Community Work, London: Oxford University Press. Provides a clear description of a more process and group-oriented approach to community work. See, also, T. R. Batten's earlier, and very influential, text: (1957) Communities and their Development. An introductory study with special reference to the Tropics, London: Oxford University Press.

Broady, M., Clarke, R., Marks, H., Mills, R., Sims, E., Smith, M. & White, L. (ed. Clarke, R.) (1990) Enterprising Neighbours. The development of the community association in Britain, London: National Federation of Community Organisations. 209 + ix pages. Chapters examine community associations as a people's movement; roots and influences; early days; high promise and disappointment: fifteen post war years; community associations in changing society: 1966-1980; local groups and community development; group activities and personal development; retrospect and prospect.

Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation (1968) Community Work and Social Change. A report on training, London: Longman. 171 + xiii pages. First substantial report focused on community work. Surveyed the position of community work in the late 1960s; examined functions and aims; and argued for the development of training.

Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation (1973) Current Issues in Community Work. A Study by the Community Work Group, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 180 + xii pages. Follow-through report from the 1968 report based on the activities of various sub-groups. Chapters on the scope and value of community work; community work methods; community action; analysis and evaluation; community workers and their employers; trining; some present needs and proposals for meeting them.

Cannan, C., Berry, L. and Lyons, K. (1992) Social Work and Europe, London: Macmillan. 181 + xii pages. Has chapters on social Europe; social policies and social trends in Europe; social workers, organizations and the state; branches and themes of social work (concentrates on Germany and France); French social work; participation; and social action. Includes material on community work.

Cockburn, C. (1977) The Local State. Management of cities and people, London: Pluto Press. 207 pages. Important critique of the ‘turn to community’ in local government and how it may serve to strengthen corporatism.

Francis, D., Henderson, P. and Thomas, D. N. (1984) A Survey of Community Workers in the United Kingdom. National Institute for Social Work. 30 pages. Useful snapshot of the state of community work in the early 1980s.

Henderson, P., Jones, D. and Thomas. D. N. (eds.) The Boundaries of Change in Community Work, London: George Allen and Unwin. 243 + xii pages. As the title suggests, a collection that looks to community work as a boundary activity (particularly within or on the boundaries of the agencies that employ workers). Sections on: the context of community work practice; case studies of practice; and influence, organization and professional growth. Good chapters by Baldock on the origins of community work, practice and theory (Tasker) plus some useful case studies.

Henderson, P. and Thomas, D. N. (eds.) (1981) Readings in Community Work. George Allen and Unwin. 198 + x pages (A4). Good collection of material with sections on the nature of community work; key ideas in community work (community, need, poweer, ideology, change); interventions in the practice of community work (neighbourhood work, policy and organizational change, education in the community, promoting participation; and the idea of strategy in community work (tactics, role, sponsorship, evaluation).

Henderson, P. Wright, A. and Wyncoll, K. (eds.) (1982) Successes and Struggles on Council Estates. Tenant action and community work, London: Association of Community Workers. 232 pages. Good collection of case studies of practice in the early 1980s. Sections on generalist community work on council estates; city-wide action; community work methods; and linking practice to social policy.

Jones, D. and Mayo, M. (eds.) (1974) Community Work One, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 277 + xvi pages. This book, from the Association of Community Workers, was the first of eight published by Routledge and Kegan Paul. It provided a significant pointer to developing practice and contained a number of important articles. Part one dealt with change, conflict and the grass roots; part two: making services relevant and responsive; part three: training; and part four: strategies for change (two critiques by Marris and Bennington). The editors also put together (1975) Community Work Two, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 202 + xiv pages. It had sections on community work participation and politics; training and the development of community work as a profession; work in progress / developments in the field; research; and consumer organizations. Other titles in the series were:

Mayo, M. (ed.) (1977) Women in the Community. Community Work 3, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Curno, P. (ed.) (1978) Political Issues and Community Work. Community Work 4, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Craig, G., Mayo, M. and Sharman, N. (eds.) (1979) Jobs and Community Action. Community Work 5, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Smith, L. and Jones, D. (eds.) (1981) Deprivation, Participation and Community Action. Community Work 6, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Ohri, A., Manning, B. and Curno, P. (eds.) (1982) Community Work and Racism. Community Work 7, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Craig, G., Derricourt, N. and Loney, M. (eds.) (1982) Community Work and the State. Towards a radical practice. Community Work 8, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Kuenstler, P. (ed.) (1961) Community Organization in Great Britain, London: Faber and Faber. 164 pages. The first substantial British collection of material - drawing on the (1959) Younghusband Report’s definition of community organization. Contains some fascinating material - an overview of community organization in Britain (Kuenstler); the needs of old urban areas (Mays); new estates (Smith): new towns (Taylor); councils of social service (Littlewood and Clements); community associations and centres (Milligan); community and sociology (Dennis); and conclusions (Goetschius). Includes a useful bibliography.

Leaper, R. A. B. (1968) Community Work. Common ground explored in an experimental course, London: National Council of Social Service. 211 + vi pages. Provides a nice snapshot of thinking and brings out the then central focus - of working with community groups. Chapters on 'community', surveying, administration, techniques and principles, process and learning. Various useful appendices.

Loney, M. (1983) Community Against Government. The British Community Development Project 1968-78: a study of government incompetence. Heinemann. 221 + vii pages. Definitive study of the Initiative and how the twelve local projects variously developed a radical critique (and came to a sticky end). Chapters deal with the context for the Initiative; the development of the CDP proposal; establishing local CDPs; the first four projects; issues of practice; developing difficulties in the central administration; the emergence of the radical CDP; CDPs and the politics of urban change and conflict; and the decline and fall of rational incrementalism. There is an extensive bibliography.
Some CDP Reports and Publication

Selected by Popple (1995: 123-124)

Benwell CDP (1978). Slums on the Drawing Board, Final Report No. 4. Newcastle: Benwell DP.

Birmingham CDP (1987). Youth on the Dole, Final Report No. 4. Birmingham and Oxford: Birmingham CDP Research Team and the Social Evaluation Unit, Oxford University.

CDP (1978). Leasehold Loopholes, Final Report No. 5. Birmingham and Oxford: Birmingham CDP Research Team and the Social Evaluation Unit, Oxford University.

Butterworth, E., Lees, R. and Arnold, P. (1980). The Challenge of Community Work,

Final Report of Batley CDP, Papers in Community Studies, No. 24. York: University of York.

Canning Town CDP (1975a). Canning Town to North Woolwich: The Aims of Industry? London: Canning Town CDP.

Canning Town CDP (1975b). Canning Town's Declining Community Income. London: Canning Town CDP.

Canning Town CDP (1976). Growth and Decline: Canning Town's Economy 1846-1946. London: Canning Town CDP.

CDP (1977a). Gilding the Ghetto, The State and The Poverty Experiments. London: Community Development Project Inter-project Editorial Team.

CDP (1977b). The Costs of Industrial Change. London: Community Development Project and Inter-project Editorial Team.

CDP IIU (1975). The Poverty of the Improvement Programme. London: CDP Information and Intelligence Unit.

CDP IIU (1976a). Profits against Houses. London: CDP Information and Intelligence Unit.

CDP IIU (1976b). Whatever Happened to Council Housing? London: CDP Information and Intelligence Unit.

CDP PEC (1979). The State and the Local Economy. London: CDP PEC and Publications Distributive Co-operative.

CIS/CDP (1976). Cutting the Welfare State (Who Profits?). London: Counter Information Services and CDP.

Corina, L. (1977). Oldham CDP. An Assessment of its Impact and Influence on the Local Authority, Papers in Community Studies, No. 9. York: University of York.

Corina, L., Collis, P. and Crosby, C. (1979). Oldham CDP. The Final Report. York: University of York.

Coventry CDP (1975a). Coventry and Hillfields: Prospetity and the Persistence of Inequality, Final Report, Part 1. Coventry: Coventry CDP.

Coventry CDP (1975b). Background Working Papers, Final Report, Part 2. Coventry: Coventry CDP.

North Tyneside CDP (1978a). North Shields: Working Class Politics and Housing 1900- 77, Final Report, Vol. 1. Newcastle: Newcastle upon Tyne Polytechnic.

North Tyneside CDP (1978b). North Shields: Organizing for Change in a Working Class Area, Final Report, Vol. 3. Newcastle: Newcastle upon Tyne Polytechnic.

North Tyneside CDP (1978c). North Shields: Organizing for Change in a Working Class Area: The Action Groups, Final Report, Vol. 4. Newcastle: Newcastle upon Tyne Polytechnic.

North Tyneside CDP (1978d). Women's Work, Final Report, Vol. 5. Newcastle: Newcastle upon Tyne Polytechnic.

North Tyneside CDP (1978e). In and Out of Work: A Study of Unemployment, Low Pay and Income Maintenance Services. Newcastle: Newcastle upon Tyne Polytechnic.

Penn, R. and Alden, J. (1977). Upper Afan CDP Final Report to Sponsors. Joint Report by Action Team and Research Team Directors, Cardiff, University of Wales, Institute of Science and Technology. Cardiff: University of Wales.
Some other publications

Lees, R. and Smith, G. (1975) Action-Research in Community Development, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 202 + xi pages. Collection of papers written by people involved in the projects. Sections on the national community Development Project; establishing local prjects; action in the local areas; and action and research strategies. Some useful materialon community education.

Thomas, D. N. (1976) Organizing for Social Change. A study in the theory and practice of community work, London: George Allen and Unwin. 199 pages. Chapters on the relevance and value of neighbourhood resources; criteria for intervention; community actors and the organization and structure of the Southwark Community Project; opening moves in neighbourhood work; residents; community workers; material resources; working with service agencies; and assessment of Southwark Community Project.



McConnell, C. (ed.) (1996) Community Education. The making of an empowering profession, Edinburgh: Scottish Community Education Council. 372 + viii pages. Very useful collection of documents, articles and extracts that detail the development of community education in Scotland. Includes material from the Alexander Report, and from many of the key writers on Scottish community education since the mid 1970s.

Midgley, J. et al (1986) Community Participation, Social Development and the State, London: Methuen. 181 + ix pages. The book begins with an excellent overview of community participation and is followed by chapters exploring community participation in health, education, rural development, urban development and housing, and social work. Midgley completes the collection with an examination of community participation, the state and social policy. Good for placing 'community work' within a wider context of practice thinking.

Popple, K. (1995) Analysing Community Work. Its theory and practice, Buckingham: Open University Press. 131 + x pages. Provides an introductory overview with chapters on: the development of British community work; community work theory; models of community work; community work in practice; conclusion and future directions. The models are basically those of Thomas (1983) with the addition of community care; feminist community work; and Black and anti-racist community work.

David N. Thomas (1983) The Making of Community Work, London: George Allen and Unwin. 324 + x pages. The first major review of community work in the United Kingdom since the 1960s and really the best historical overview. Chapters on the 1960s and 1970s; participation in politics and the community; the contribution of community work; practice in the 1980s; training for community work; employing and funding workers; communication, research etc.

Willmott, P. (1989) Community Initiatives. Patterns and prospects, London: Policy Studies Institute. 110 pages. Important review of developments that charts the use of ‘community in policy initiatives - community policing, community care, etc. Was an expression of the turn to ‘community practice’ that happened in the early 1990s.
Community work - principles and practice texts

Here I have tried to pick out some of the more popular and contemporary texts that have appeared. Material on community development and community organization can be found elsewhere. Earlier material is signposted in the section on the development of community work.

Francis, D. and Henderson, P. (1992) Working with Rural Communities, London: Macmillan. 160 + xiv pages. Compact guide in the Practical Social Work series and focused on the UK. Chapters on rural development and community work; communities and people in rural areas; developing a strategy; a model of rural community work; working from a distance; focused, indirect work; direct community work; management in rural community work; and rural community work in the 1990s..

Harrris, V. (ed.) (1994) Community Work Skills Manual 2e, Newcastle: Association of Community Workers. Thoroughly updated and extended, the handbook provides practical guidance on a comprehensive range of questions affecting community work. 24 sections deal with matters such as roles, skills and responsibilities; tacking inequalities; empowerment and participation; gettin to know a community; working with groups; meetings;volunteers; training; supervision; surveys; campaigning; funding; organizing conferences and events; handling information; publications; evaluation; managament committees; and local government. Within each section there are briefing sheets dealing with different aspects. Accessible and designed for use with local activists.

Henderson, P. and Thomas, D. N. (2001) Skills in Neighbourhood Work 3e, London: Routledge. 296 pages. This remains the standard treatment of neighbourhood work in the UK. Although somewhat dry and 'technicist', the book's strength lies in its comprehensiveness and focus on process. Chapters examine some of the ideas around which the book is organized; entering the neighbourhood; getting to know the neighbourhood; needs, goals and roles;making contacts and bringing people together; forming and building organizations; helping to clarify goals and priorities; keeping the organization going; dealing with friends and enemies; leavings and endings; and a little more about process.

Pearse, M. and Smith, J. (1990) Community Groups Handbook, Nottingham: Journeyman. 119 +viii pages. Handbook for community groups (first published in 1977) with sections on how community groups work;community groups and public authorities; and taking action.

Robertson, C. and Shaw, J. (1997) Participatory Video. A practical approach to using video creativity in group development, London: Routledge. 256 pages. Very much a practical guide to using videa in group development work. Features over 60 exercises and advice on workshop planning; video equipment; and running long-term projects.

Skinner, S. (1997) Building Community Strengths. A resource book on capacity building, London: Community Development Foundation. 136 + xiv pages. Part one is an introduction to capacity building; Part two deals with developing people; Part three: developing organizitions; Part four: developing community infrastructure; and Part five: developing plans and strategies. A practical guide and rather 'listy'.

Twelvetrees, A. (1982; 1991; 2001) Community Work, London: Palgrave Macmillan. 224 pages. Popular practical guide with an emphasis on working with community groups. Chapters on what is community work; contact making, analysis and planning; practical considerations in working with groups; psychological considerations in working with community groups; working towards institutional change; and survival.

Brief guides

The Community Development Foundation have produced a number of short guides/briefing papers arising from UK community work practice:

Clinton, L. (1993) Community Development and the Arts, London: Community Development Foundation. 35 + vi pages.

Francis, D. and Henderson, P. (1994) Community Development and Rural Issues, London: Community Development Foundation. 45 + x pages.

Gilchrist, A. (1995) Community Development and Networking, London: Community Development Foundation. 42 + x pages.

Heaton, K. and Sayer, J. (1992) Community Development and Child Welfare, London: Community Development Foundation. 47 + viii pages.

McDonald, D. and Tungatt, M. (1992) Community Development and Sport, London: Community Development Foundation. 42 + x pages.

Smith, J. (1991) Community Development and Tenant Action, London: Community Development Foundation. 42 + x pages.

Taylor, M. (1991) Signposts to Community Development, London: Community Development Foundation. 36 + x pages.
Community work - aspects of practice

Barr, A. (1991) Practising Community Development. Experience in Strathclyde, London: Community Development Foundation. 184 6+ xii pages. Rare study of the actual practice and thinking of workers which makes for fascinating reading. Dispels much of the radical rhetoric around the work. Sections look at the study; the nature of community work; workers views of their practice (includes aspirations; workers and managers; politicians, and community groups); and 'reflections' (community work and local government, the state, planning and participation; local interests).

Butcher, H., Collis, P., Glen, A. and Sills, P. (1980) Community Groups in Action. Case studies and analysis, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 290 + xiv pages. One of the few substantial studies of community groups and community initiatives. The book combines five substantial case studies with a thematic commentary and analysis. The latter looks at: groups and their environment; goals and foal achievement; organization: process and structure; strategy, tactics and resources; the role of the community worker.

Butcher, H., Glen, A., Henderson, P. and Smith, J. (eds.) (1993) Community and Public Policy, London: Pluto Press. 281 + xv pages. Part one deals with concepts and context: methods and themes in community practice, social change, community policy. Part two looks at community policy in practice: youth work; community arts; community enterprise; community policing; community government; community care. Part three offers some critical perspectives.

Cannan, C. and Warren, C. (eds.) (1997) Social Action with Children and Families. A community development approach to child and family welfare, London: Routledge. 225 + xiv pages. This book looks beyond the usual narrow confines of British social work texts - looking at more community oriented forms of engagement (especially family centres) and drawing on traditions of practice from the UK, Germany and France. There is some recognition of the potential of more educative approaches and a concern with local networks and institutions.

Cooke, B. and Kothari, U. (eds.) (2001) Participation: The new tyranny?, London: Zed Books. 224 pages. Popular and useful overview of community participation and participatory techniques.

Cooke, I. and Shaw, M. (1997) Radical Community Work. Perspectives from practice, Edinburgh: Moray House. 187 pages. Examines the changing context of radical community work in Scotland. Chapters examine partnership; campaigning; housing work; community care; disability; women and community work practice; lone parents; anti-racist work; and community arts.

Craig, G., Derricourt, N. and Loney, M. (eds.) (1982) Community Work and the State. Towards a radical practice. Community Work 8, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 166 + ix pages. Part one looks at thinking politically about practice; part two: issues and strategies; and part three: radical developments outside the UK.

Curno, P. (ed.) (1978) Political Issues and Community Work. Community Work 4, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 264 + xvi pages. Collection explores dilemmas of community work and ideology; local politics and community work;and perspectives for development.

Dominelli, L. (1990; 2006) Women and Community Action, Bristol: Policy Press. Overview of developments and contemporary practice. See, also, Dominelli, L. and McLeod (1989) Feminist Social Work, London: Macmillan.

Elsdon, K. T. with J. Reynolds and S. Stewart (1995) Voluntary Organizations. Citizenship, learning and change, Leicester: National Institute of Adult Continuing Education. 168 + viii pages. Important report of a six year research project in England, Scotland and Wales. Examines the nature of voluntary organization and the educative possibilities of associational life. An overview of the 31 case studies that formed the basis of the research is included. The study also produced three useful collections of case studies plus an overall study of voluntary organization in Retford.

* Elsdon, K. T. (1991) Adult Learning in Voluntary Organizations. Volume 1: case studies 1 and 2, Nottingham: University of Nottingham Department of Adult Education. (A group of the National Women's Register plus a rural community association)
* Stewart, S., Reynolds, J. and Elsdon, K. T. (1992) Adult Learning in Voluntary Organizations. Volume 2: case studies 3 - 15, Nottingham: University of Nottingham Department of Adult Education. 236 pages. (Includes the Percival Guildhouse, Rugby; self-help groups; a Women's Institute, and an arts centre).
* Elsdon, K. T. with Stewart, S., and Reynolds, J. (1993) Adult Learning in Voluntary Organizations. Volume 3: case studies 16 - 30, Nottingham: University of Nottingham Department of Adult Education.
* Reynolds, J. et al (1993) A Town in Action: Voluntary networks in Retford. Volume 4 of Adult Learning in Voluntary Organizations, Nottingham: University of Nottingham Department of Adult Education.

Ellis, J. (1989) Breaking New Ground. Community Development with Asian Communities, London: Bedford Square Press. Study of a number of projects and initiatives that spreads light on developments in practice in the late 1980s.

Goetschius, G. W. (1969) Working with Community Groups. Using community development as a method of social work, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 250 + xix pages. Exploration of work undertaken with housing estate community groups. Close and thorough account of practice with chapters on: the background to the study; factors affecting the development of the service; development; examples of field-work; the role of the worker; conditions of fieldwork practice; further considerations and conclusions.

Henderson, P. (1995) Children and Communities, London: Pluto Press. 203 + xvi pages. While not specifically oriented around community work - common themes run through the contributions. The book is split into four parts: care and protection; environment; education; and neighbourhood.

Henderson, P. and Francis, D. (1993) Rural Action. A collection of community work case studies, London: Pluto Press. 178 + xi pages. The book is split into three parts: remote rural areas; areas of industrial change; and issue-based work. Includes a number of chapters on less explored aspects of the work e.g. village halls; rural housing and adult education.

Hickey, S. and Mohan, G. (eds.) (2004) Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation? - Exploring New Approaches to Participation in Development, London: Zed Books. 304 pages. Helpful debunking of simplistic critiques of community participation as largely rhetorical or tyrannical. Explores different examples of practice and examines recent convergence between participatory development and participatory governance.

Hoggett, P. (ed.) (1997) Contested Communities: experiences, struggles, policies, Bristol: Policy Press ISBN 1 86134 036 2. £15.95. Following introductory essays on contested communities (Hoggett) and neighbours (Crow), this book has sections on community and social diversity; local government and community; and community participation and empowerment. The book uses a set of case studies to examine the sources of community activism, the ways communities define themselves and defined by outsiders, and the room for partnerships with different agencies. Internal conflicts within communities are also examined.

Jacobs, S. and Popple, K. (eds.) (1994) Community Work in the 1990s, Nottingham: Spokesman. 177 pages. Includes chapters on the values base; socialism as living; community work praxis; Black British to Black European; women, community work and the state; feminist work; Black empowerment; rural community work; community organizing.

Lupton, R. D. (2005) Renewing the City: Reflections on Community Development and Urban Renewal, London: InterVarsity Press. 240 pages.

Putnam, R. D. (2000) Bowling Alone. The collapse and revival of American community, New York: Simon and Schuster. 540 pages. Groundbreaking book that marshals evidence from an array of empirical and theoretical sources. Putnam argues there has been a decline in 'social capital' in the USA. He charts a drop in associational activity and a growing distance from neighbours, friends and family. Crucially he explores some of the possibilities that exist for rebuilding social capital. A modern classic. Chapter One of the book is extracted on-line at the Simon and Shuster website (Bowling Alone).

Tett, L. (2006) Community Education, Lifelong Learning and Social Inclusion, Edinburgh: Dunedin Academic Press. 96 pages. Explores the contribution in Scotland of community education to social inclusion and lifelong learning. Lyn Tett draws from a range of contexts including detached youth work, family literacy, health education and community regeneration programmes.

Van Rees, W. et al (1991) A Survey of Contemporary Community Development in Europe, The Hague: 7 Opbouwteksten. 148 pages. Chapters examine community development and the ‘Community’; community work as a professional strategy; combatting poverty; social networks; integrated apporaches to development; work experience; evaluating innovatory social projects.
Other references

Alinsky, S. D. (1946) Reveille for Radicals (1969 edn.), New York: Random House.

Alinsky, S. D. (1971) Rules for Radicals. A pragmatic primer for realistic radicals, New York: Vintage.

Baldock, P. (1977) 'Why community action? The historical origins of the radical trend in British community work', Community Development Journal 12(2) also reprinted in P. Henderson and D. N. Thomas (eds.) (1981) Readings in Community Work, London: George Allen and Unwin.

Beveridge, W. H. (1948) Voluntary Action. A report on methods of social advance, London: George Allen and Unwin.

Brierley, D. (2003) Growing Community: Making Groups Work with Young People, Carlisle: Authentic Lifestyle.

Butcher, H. (1992) 'Community work: current realities, contemporary trends' in P. Carter, T. Jeffs & M. K. Smith (eds.) Changing Social Work and Welfare, Buckingham: Open University Press.

Butcher, H., Glen, A., Henderson, P. and Smith, J. (eds.) (1993) Community and Public Policy, London: Pluto Press.

Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research at Sheffield Hallam University (2005) New Deal for Communities 2001-2005: An Interim Evaluation, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. http://www.neighbourhood.gov.uk/publications.asp?did=1625. Accessed February 2, 2006.

Coates, K. and Silburn, R. (1970) Poverty. The forgotten Englishmen, Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Follett, M. P. (1918) The New State. Group organization the solution of popular government (3rd impression [1920] with introduction by Lord Haldane), London: Longmans Green.

Eade, D. (1997) Capacity Building. An approach to people-centred development, Oxford: Oxfam.

Glass, N. (2005) 'Surely some mistake', The Guardian January 5, 2005, http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,1074,1383034,00.html. Accessed February 2, 2006.

Hardcastle, D. A. and Powers, P. R. (2004) Community Practice: Theories and Skills for Social Workers 2e, New York: Oxford University Press.

Harrison, J. F. C. (1961) Learning and Living. A study in the history of the English adult education movement 1790-1960, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

HMSO (1960) The Youth Service in England and Wales ('The Albemarle Report'), London: HMSO.

HMSO (1968) Report of the Committee on Local Authority and Allied Personal Social Services (The 'Seebohm Report'), London: HMSO.

Jones, D. (1977) 'Community Work in the UK' in H. Specht and A. Vickery (eds.) Integrating Social Work Methods, London: George Allen and Unwin. [Also in P. Henderson & D. N. Thomas (eds.) (1981) Readings in Community Work. George Allen and Unwin.

Kelly, T. (1970) A History of Adult Education in Great Britain. From the Middle Ages to the Twentieth Century, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

Martin, G.Currie (1924) The Adult School Movement. Its origin and development, London: National Adult School Union.

Mayo, M. (1975) 'Community development: a radical alternative?' in R. Bailey and M. Brake (eds.) Radical Social Work, London: Edward Arnold.

Ministry of Education (1944; 1946) Community Centres, London: HMSO.

Ministry of Housing and Local Government (1969) People and Planning. Report of the Committee on Public Participation in Planning, ('The Skeffington Report'), London: HMSO.

National Institute of Social Work (1982) Social Workers. Their Role and Tasks (The Barclay Report). Bedford Square Press.

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2002) Tenants Managing: Evaluation of tenant management organizations in England, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. http://www.odpm.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1155630. Accessed February 2, 2006.

Pimlott, J. A. R. (1935) Toynbee Hall. Fifty years of social progress 1884-1934, London: Dent.

Principal Community Education Officers, Scotland (1992) Community Development in the Community Education Service, Edinburgh: Scottish Community Education Council.

Ross, M. (1955) Community Organization. Theory, Principle and Practice (1967 edn.), New York: Harper & Row.

Rothman, J. (1968) 'Three models of community organization practice' in Social Work Practice 1968, New York: Columbia University Press.

Scottish Education Department (1975) Adult Education. The challenge of change. Report by a Committee of Inquiry appointed by the Secretary of State for Scotland under the Chairmanship of Professor K. J. W. Alexander, Edinburgh: HMSO.

Scottish Executive (2003) Working and learning together to build stronger communities. Working draft Community Learning and Development Guidance, Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Available in the informal education archives: http://www.infed.org/archives/gov_uk/working_together.htm.

Shragge, E. (1999) Activism and Social Change, Broadview Press

Singh, B. (2005) Making Change Happen: Community Organisations Improving Support for Black Disabled People in the Community, York: York Publishing Services/Joseph Rowntree Trust.

Twelvetrees, A. (1976) Community Associations and Centres. A comparative study, Oxford: Pergamon.

Twelvetrees, A. (1985) Democracy and the Neighbourhood, London: National Federation of Community Organisations.

Willmott, P. (1963) The Evolution of a Community. A study of Dagenham after forty years, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Young, A. F. and Ashton, E. T.(1956) British Social Work in the Nineteenth Century, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Younghusband, E. L. (1959) Report of the Working Party on Social Workers in the Local Authority Health and Welfare Services, London: HMSO.

community studies

Over the years a distinctive body of literature has developed around 'community studies'. Individual contributions tend to fall across disciplinary boundaries - some are labelled as sociology, some as anthropology, and yet others as geography or urban studies. What follows is a quick guide to the literature and an attempt to bring out some key questions and themes.

I have divided the studies examined into three groups:

* North American studies

* African studies

* United Kingdom/Irish studies

There have also been a number of studies in South America and in India and other Southern societies - and some of these are reviewed.
A starting point

To help us sort our way through the material I am going use what Bell and Newby describe as a minimum definition. For them a community study is concerned:

with the study of the interrelationships of social institutions in a locality. This does not mean all social institutions locally present have to be studied but, unless these interrelations are considered they will not considered as community studies. (ibid: 19)

This way of defining community studies excludes research which focuses on a particular social institution in a locality. For example, the famous studies of the family undertaken in Bethnal Green (e.g. Young and Willmott 1957) would not be included. For the moment we are going to stay with this - but we do need to note that other commentators include these and similar studies within their definition of the area (see, for example, Frankenberg 1966).

As you will see from the use of locality in the definition, most of the studies we will be looking at are concerned with community as place. Within that the interest is in the inter-relationships of social institutions (hence our concern with networks). However, this does not mean that we do not recognize the importance of looking at a particular element or phenomenon in a neighbourhood.
Community studies as texts and as a method

In a literature review we are obviously concerned with texts - the reports and books produced by researchers as a result of their labours. However, we also need to note that many of those involved consider also to be a method - a particular process. It is true that community studies share a number of characteristics:

the researchers have usually lived in the community studied (or spent a considerable amount of time involved in everyday activities there). They have shared some of the experiences of some of the inhabitants. In other words they are field workers. the researchers have tended to be not only physically close to what they are studying - but also emotionally close. 'This means that community studies are very sympathetic - critics would say, over sympathetic - portraits of a locality (Bell and Newby 1971: 55).

while the researchers may use large scale surveys and various forms of network analysis, they place a special emphasis on participant observation and sustained conversation with local people. They substantial use of 'key informants' (such as Whyte (1943; 1955) did of 'Doc' in Street Corner Society). They are, in other words, eclectic in their methods.

the books and articles that researchers produce, given the processes they have gone through, tend to be lively, full of graphic description (and sometimes a bit short on theory).

Just how distinctive a method it is is open to question. While the component parts of community studies are not unique in themselves - but are necessary elements of researchers' repertoires (see Bell 1987; 1993) - taken together there is something distinctive about the approach.
North American community studies

The North American literature is particularly strong. The first, classic, work in this genre is generally said to be Robert Lynd and Helen Merrell Lynd's (1929) Middletown. A study in American Culture. They had initially set out to examine religious provision in a small American town but found that this could not be done without a wider exploration.

The aim... was to study synchronously the interwoven trends that are the life of a small American city. A typical city, strictly speaking, does not exist, but the city studied was selected as having many features common to a wide group of communities. Neither field work nor report has attempted to prove any thesis; the aim has been, rather, to record observed phenomena, thereby raising questions and suggesting possible fresh points of departure in the study of group behaviour. (Lynd and Lynd 1929: 3)

This is the opening paragraph to the book and it contains a number of elements that have remained important to community studies (and a matter for some debate both within and without the tradition - see Bell and Newby 1971: 82-93). These include:

looking at a number of elements at any one time and seeing how they interconnect. choosing some neighbourhood or community which appeared to have aspects that could have relevance for other places.

not seeking to prove a thesis but to gain data to stimulate debate and theorizing.

looking at group behaviour.

In 1929 the book created quite a stir. There hadn't been a study like it - it was the first 'scientific and objective' study of small town life. I put 'scientific and objective' in quotes because there are questions around this. Were the Lynds commendable in their concern to let the situation speak to them; could they be that unbiased and let the data speak for themselves? Questions like this are still asked today in debates concerning different approaches to research. In many respects the Lynds' approach is very close to what Glaser and Strauss (1967) have described as 'grounded theorizing' (see Strauss and Corbin 1990: 21-28).

Having given a brief outline of why Middletown was chosen and the historical setting, the Lynds ordered their book around six key areas:

getting a living, making a home,

training the young,

using leisure,

engaging in religious practices, and

engaging in community activities.

This was a significant approach in that it focuses on activities - the things that people do - and is drawn from anthropological work at the time (Lynd and Lynd 1929: 4).

Such was the success of their work that they returned to Muncie (the town in their study) in 1935 to conduct a follow-up study which sought to make explicit the elements of permanence and of change (Lynd and Lynd 1937: 487). They found that Middletown had met with four types of experience 'peculiarly conducive to cultural change: sudden and great strain on its institutions, widespread dislocation of individual habits, pressure for change from the larger culture surrounding it, and at some points the actual implementing from without of a changed line of action (op cit). There had been ten years of book and depression. The result was a tough exposure of the sources of power in the small town and for all the claims to neutrality, the study reveals the writers 'militant and evangelical feelings about what was wrong with American society' (Bell and Newby 1971: 84). Crucially, 'the two Middletown monographs illustrate well that it is relatively short step from the community study as empirical description to the community study as normative prescription' (op cit). This is a lesson we do well to heed.

A number of classic studies followed. These include:

The Gold Coast and the Slum (Zorbaugh 1929) - study of the Lower North Side, Chicago. This asked the fundamental question as to whether in such an urban setting it was possible to call an area a 'community' at all. It was one of a large number of research projects based in Chicago concerned with urbanism and 'human ecology'. These included studies of hobos, dance halls and gangs. They saw the city as an ecological system (Park et al 1925).

Urbanism as a way of life (Wirth 1938). This wasn't a study but rather a very influential article produced by one of the 'Chicago School'. Wirth argued that as the size of a population grows, so it becomes difficult for each individual to know all the others personally:

Characteristically, urbanites meet one another in highly segmental roles. They are, to be sure, dependent upon more people for the satisfaction of their life needs than are rural people and thus are associated with a great number of organized groups, but they are less dependent upon particular persons, and their dependence on others is confined to a highly fractionalized aspect of the other's round of activity. This is essentially what is meant by saying the city is characterized by secondary rather than primary contacts. The contacts may be face to face, but they are, nevertheless, impersonal, superficial, transitory and segmental. The reserve, the indifference and the blasé outlook which urbanites manifest in their relationships may thus be regarded as devices for immunizing themselves against the personal claims and expectations of others. (Wirth 1938: 12)

The article has been a central reference point in urban studies since it was written - and as such attracted much criticism. Among the questions raised is the conflicting nature of the evidence in relation to Wirth's claims. Similarly, there are worries that he views the city as a closed system - when really it is an open or part system (unlike the folk or rural society he is comparing it with). In other words, the two are not directly comparable (Hannerz 1980: 66).

Yankee City (Warner and Lunt 1941). This was another study of a small American town (Newburyport, New England). This study used a rather crude functionalist or systems approach. It viewed Yankee City as a 'working whole' in which 'each part had a definite function which had to be performed, or substitutes acquired, if the whole society were to maintain itself' (ibid: 14).

Street Corner Society (Whyte 1943; 1955). For this study of 'Cornerville' Whyte lived with an Italian family in Boston's East End. It is perhaps best known as a study of gang and group life and as a classic example of participant observation. However, it also has extensive material on racketeering, politics and the social structure.

Small Town in Mass Society (Vidich and Bensman 1958) - this was a study of 'Springdale', a small rural community in upstate New York. Like the Lynds, the researchers did not go to the town with highly developed hypotheses. They argued that it is not possible to talk about Springdale as a whole in relation to mass society - but rather only about the relationship of particular groups.

The class and political analysis opened our perception to a number of sharp contradictions in the communities institutions and values. The public enactment of community life and public statements of community values seemed to bear little relationship to the community's operating institutions and the private lives of its members. (Vidich and Bensman 1958: x)

The study was important for other reasons - the attention to methodology (in particular participant observation, the validity of field data, and the role of theory in field work). It also caused something of a scandal as the figures involved were directly recognizable; and it made explicit a number of things that were left unsaid in the community (Bell and Newby 1971: 120).

Crestwood Heights (Seeley et al 1956) - is a study of suburbia and of middle class life. It was based in an area of Toronto in which there was not strong local identification (most of the men left the area to work). It was, by and large, a residential community 'devoted to child rearing' (ibid: 11). Upto this point there had been few studies of this type of neighbourhood and it fed into a growing concern or interest in changing patterns of life in urban societies. This included worries about the 'breakdown of community', the lack of commitment to neighbourhood because of working patterns, a growing individualization and so on. Much of this 'myth of suburbia' was disputed by Gans (1967) in his study of a similar area - Levittown. He argued that such differences that existed did not flow so much from the fact that the neighbourhood was a suburb, but that it was relatively new (and people took time to establish themselves in places).

These, then, are some of the classic studies. As will be seen from their dates of publication - the main texts were published some time ago. In part this may be to do with fashions in research. Large scale studies of this kind are expensive to undertake and for them to be funded researchers have to make a case for some applicability for policy formulation. The result of this is that more recent studies are either more directly tied into policy initiatives such as urban programmes; or focus more closely on a particular phenomenon. Examples of the later include Heath's (1983) wonderful study of children's language usage in 'Roadville' and 'Trackton', Brody's (1987) study of hunters in the Canadian north, and Sorin's (1990) study of Brownsville Boys Club. Each of these examples would probably fall outside the minimum definition used by Bell and Newby.
African studies

As we have seen, a great deal of the early American work owed much to the activities of a committed group of sociologists at the University of Chicago with their particular focus on urban studies. Significantly the only other single body of localized urban ethnography comes from Central Africa - the product of Rhodes-Livingstone Institute set up in 1937 and later taken into the Institute for Social Research at the University of Zambia (Hannerz 1980).

One of the interesting things about the work of the Institute was that it paid a great deal of attention to change and the rise of urbanism. While much anthropology seems to focus on 'traditional' societies and groupings (and is written in a haze of what Rosaldo (1989) describes as 'imperialist nostalgia'), these studies looked to disequilibrium. In this sense they shared much with the American studies. One of the first explorations was of Broken Hill a copper mining area (Wilson 1941) and this was followed by publications dealing with various aspects of local life and institutions (e.g. Epstein 1958; Gluckman 1964). While it could be said that they paid insufficient attention to the material basis of local life, what the writers associated with the Institute were able to do was to explore social relationships in a time of change. In particular, the relationship between rural and so called 'traditional' institutions and ways of life, and the new forms found in urban conurbations. They were the precursor to a number of studies which focus on urbanisation, underdevelopment and marginality (e.g. Lomnitz 1977; Perlman 1976; and Roberts 1978 - these are all Latin American studies). Perlman, for example, discusses squatter settlements (favelas) in Brazil and argues that from the 'outside' they are frequently viewed as a blight and as a sign of disintegration and large scale social problems. From the 'inside' things look very different. Care is taken with housing, people seek to work and 'there is a remarkable degree of social cohesion and mutual trust and a complex internal social organization, involving numerous clubs and voluntary associations' (Perlman 1976: 13). As Lomnitz says 'social life in shantytown unfolds like a complex design for survival' (1977: 3).

At first sight, many of the classic anthropological works might also be considered as 'community studies'. After all they examine workings of particular groups in particular localities. However, their orientation to exploring culture can quickly take then away from studying the inter-relationships that interest us here. For example, Evans-Pritchard's (1940) well known account of the Nuer people while looking at questions of livelihood and politics is doing so for two ends: to describe their life; and to lay bare some of the principles of their social structure (1940: 7). This can be compared with the Lynds concern to study 'synchronously the interwoven trends that are the life of a small American city'. However, a number of more recent anthropological studies are more closely allied to our concerns here (e.g. Southall and Gutkind 1957; and Parkin 1969). One particularly interesting piece of work is Obbo's exploration of women's struggle for economic independence based on work undertaken in Wabigalo and Namuwongo, Uganda. While not being a community study as such, it does provide a very necessary counterbalance to the dominant concentration on the activities of men in African communities ( a problem shared by a number of other community studies - see below). Obbo is able to show the strategies women used for achieving economic autonomy and hence improved social conditions - strategies such as migration, hard work and manipulation (Obbo 1980: 5). 'The women put pressure on traditional ideologies to create options that enabled them to share in the resources and alternative life-styles available in their societies' (op cit).

Before leaving the African studies it is necessary to address crucial questions concerning researchers relationship with colonialism and imperialism. The anthropologists at the Rhodes-Livingstone Institute, for example, were reliant on monies from the colonial administration to undertake their work - and, indeed, did specific pieces of research for the administrators. Just how much their efforts contributed to the operation of the colonial government is open to some question - only rarely have anthropologists contributed in any sustained way to development projects (Mair 1984: 11). Policy makers tend to have a rather cynical view of research and a liking for 'practical' knowledge. This prejudice may also have been strengthened by the sympathies that many of the anthropologists associated with the Institute had with the emerging nationalist struggles in Africa. However, this should not take away the fact that the researchers interest did not lie in, for example mining communities as such, but in African miners. In this they brought with them the colonial heritage of the discipline. This is a point that is worthy of general consideration. The charge of colonialism could be levelled against the activities of many researchers, workers and educators working in communities which they consider not to be 'their own'.
United Kingdom and Irish studies

What is generally said to be the first UK/Irish study was a spin off from Warner's Yankee City studies. Two of the researchers associated with that programme looked at two townlands in County Clare - these consisted of a small town, a couple of hamlets and a number of scattered farms. As might be expected from the Yankee City study they look to the family and the community as social systems (Arensberg and Kimball 1940). This was followed by a number of influential rural studies including Rees' (1950) exploration of farm life and politics in mid-Wales; Williams (1956) influential study of Gosforth with its focus on the family; and Littlejohn's (1963) investigation of a Cheviot parish. Rees argued strongly that the traditional emphasis on kinship, neighbourliness, hospitality and lack of hierarchies was under threat from by cultural and economic invasion by the English. As Wright (1992) comments, the opposition of rural and urban is found in many other community studies at this time. Indeed, one of the common themes running through these studies (and others like them) is the extent to which 'rurality' depends on distance from, or marginality in relation to, urban centres (a theme raised above). They also carry with them a striking concern with the impact of change and modernization and the way this impacts on roles, groups and networks (see Frankenberg 1966 in particular for as example of this).

Along with these rural studies there have been a number of investigation of distinctive local industrial communities - most notably those organized around mining. The classic study in this respect is Coal is Our Life (Dennis et al 1956). In his chapter on this research, Frankenberg (1966) describes the setting for this study, Ashton, as 'the town that is a village (1966: 113-139). This is a community study in the sense that Bell and Newby describe it - but it does not set out to describe the community as a whole. Rather the focus is on three important 'formative influences on Ashton's social life - work, leisure and the family' (Dennis et al 1956: 246). One of the problems associated with community studies (and acknowledged by the writers), is that phenomena such as relationships in families, and the nature of leisure activities are viewed largely from the standpoint of their interrelationship with the activities and social relationships imposed by mining. The concern here is that this can tend to obscure, 'the fact that each of these particular sets of relationships is extended beyond the community, in both space and time' (1956: 7). With the subsequent decline in mining and the major local social changes linked to the bitter disputes of the 1980s, researchers have again turned to mining communities. The accounts range from Parker's (1986) stunning use of conversations in a small north east town to illustrate the changes and tensions, to Waddington et al (1990) more 'academic' discussion.

The urban housing estate has also been a focus for study. These studies have either tended to be linked into explorations of the formation of 'new' communities or because they are seen as manifesting particular problems. Examples of the former are Durant's (1939) study of Watling, Hendon - and Willmott's (1963) review and study of 40 years of the large LCC estate at Dagenham. (Interestingly these estates were all the sites for two of the first community associations - see Broady et al 1990). Jenning's (1962) study of the Barton Hill redevelopment in Bristol is another example of this genre. Examples of the latter include Parker (1983), and Barke and Turnbull (1992). Overlapping with these are studies of particular initiatives which contain both analysis of the local estate/community with an exploration of the work undertaken there. Spencer (1964) provides an example of this in his study of community development, youth work and play work on a Bristol estate (to be read in association with Jennings 1962). Paneth (1945) provides a similar mix in her discussion of 'deatched' youth work in Branch Street.

Last, but certainly not least in this survey are the two major studies of the last thirty or so years - of Banbury and the Isle of Sheppey. The Banbury study (Stacey 1960) and its follow-up (Stacey et al 1975) has all the ambition of the early American studies. Its strength lies in its analysis of the local inter-relation of social institutions. Through the careful analysis of the membership of various groups Stacey is able to show the various linkages between them; and how power relations may be maintained. Like Middletown we get a picture of the town over a period of time and this adds emphasis. The study is also significant for Stacey's worries about the operational use of the term 'community'. Her interest lies in the operation of 'local social systems' which, she argues, is a sounder basis for analysis than the notion of community.

The Isle of Sheppey study (Pahl 1984) and its associated work concerning young people (Wallace 1987) were primarily concerned with work - what it is and who does what in society as a whole. However, this is grounded in an analysis of the social structure on the Isle and was the result of six years research there. Its particular contribution lies in the emphasis on the exploration of household divisions of labour and how these must understood over time both in relation to the local and to impact of wider social and structural forces.
Communities, the household division of labour, and symbols

In many respects the Sheppey study addresses some of the key criticisms that can be made of much of the earlier work. That the 'representation of community in the studies was ahistorical; it relied on a model of functional equilibrium; and that it could not cope with change (Wright 1992: 202). Based on this critique, Wright argues that two new directions in community studies are required. Here she was primarily interested in rural studies but her arguments also apply to the urban situation. The first is a re-examination of the boundaries around the community arena:

This involves studying the organisation of the households, which can be done now that the 1970s and 1980s have brought an awareness of gender issues. It also entails locating the rural area in the political economy of the state. This will enable community to be reconceptualised for analytical purposes. It still leaves open the question of how the idea of community is used by people themselves. This is the second new direction in community studies, and it will be important to emphasise that 'community' is an idea, not a social or geographical entity. (ibid: 205)

Against community as a physical place then, we have to consider it as something in the mind. Here the work of Cohen (1982; 1985; 1987) and Strathern (1981; 1982) is of some importance - and signals that we have to take considerable care with the notion of community. What are interested in is the way that people view particular places and groupings, and the attachments they may have to them. Thus, this isn't to say that place is not important, but rather to argue that it cannot be taken as a simplistic given.

Community studies were consigned for some time into an abyss of theoretical sterility by obsessive attempts to formulate precise analytical definitions. We are not concerned with the positivistic niceties of analytical taxonomies. We confront an empirical phenomenon: people's attachment to community. We seek an understanding of it by trying to capture some sense of their experience and of the meanings they attach to community. (Cohen 1983: 38)

This is something in which we, as informal and community educators, can have particular insights given our concern with conversation and experience.
References

Arensberg, C. A. and Kimball, S. T. (1940) Family and Community in Ireland (2nd. edn. 1968), Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Barke, M. and Turnbull, G. (1992) Meadowell. The biography of an 'estate with problems', Avebury: Gower.

Bell, C. & Newby, H. (1971) Community Studies, London: Unwin.

Broady, M., Clarke, R., Marks, H., Mills, R., Sims, E., Smith, M. & White, L. (Ed. Clarke, R.) (1990) Enterprising Neighbours. The development of the community association in Britain, London: National Federation of Community Organisations.

Brody, H. (1987) Living Artic. Hunters of the Canadian North, London: Faber and Faber.

Dennis, F., Henriques, F. & Slaughter, C. (1956) Coal is our Life. An analysis of a Yorkshire mining community (2nd. edn. 1969), London: Tavistock.

Durant, R. (1939) Watling. A survey of social life on a new housing estate, London: P. S. King.

Epstein, A. L. (1958) Politics in an Urban African Community, Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Evans-Pritchard, E. E. (1940) The Nuer. A description of the modes of livelihood and political institutions of a Nilotic people, New York: Oxford University Press.

Frankenberg, R. (1966) Communities in Britain. Social life in town and country, Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Gans, H. J. (1967) The Levittowners, London: Allen Lane.

Glaser, B. & Strauss, A.(1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory, Chicago: Aldine.

Gluckman, M. (1964) Closed Systems and Open Minds, Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Hannerz, U.(1980) Exploring the City. Inquiries towards an urban anthropology, New York: Columbia University Press.

Heath, S. Brice (1983) Ways With Words. Language, life and work in communities and classrooms, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jennings, H. (1962) Societies in the Making. A study of development and redevelopment within a county borough, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Littlejohn, J. (1963) Westrigg. The sociology of a Cheviot parish, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Lomnitz, L. A. (1977) Networks and Marginality. Life in a Mexican Shanty Town, New York: Academic Press.

Lynd, R. S. and Lynd, H. M. (1929) Middletown. A study in American culture, New York: Harcourt Brace.

Lynd, R. S. & Merrell Lynd, H. (1937) Middletown in Transition. A study in cultural conflicts, New York: Harcourt Brace.

Mair, L. (1984) Anthropology and Development, London: Macmillan.

Obbo, C. (1980) African Women. Their struggle for economic independence, London: Zed Books.

Paneth, M. (1944) Branch Street, London: George Allen and Unwin.

Park, R. E., Burgess, E. W. and MacKenzie, R. D. (1925) The City, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Parker, T. (1983) The People of Providence. A housing estate and some of its inhabitants. (1985 edn.), London: Penguin.

Parker, T. (1986) Red Hill. A mining community (1988 edn.), Sevenoaks: Coronet.

Parkin, D. (1969) Neighbours and Nationals in an African City Ward, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Perlman, J. E. (1976) The Myth of Marginality. Urban poverty and politics in Rio de Janeiro, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Rees, A. (1950) Life in a Welsh Countryside, Cardiff: University of Wales Press.

Roberts, B. (1978) Cities of Peasants, London: Edward Arnold.

Rosaldo, R. (1989) Culture and Truth. The remaking of social anaylsis (1993 edn.), London: Routledge.

Seeley, J. R., Sim, R. A. and Loosley, E. W. (1956) Crestwood Heights, New York: Basic Books.

Sorin, G. (1990) The Nurturing Neighbourhood. Jewish community and the Brownsville Boys Club 1940-1990, New York: New York University Press.

Southall, A. and Gutkind, P. C. (1957) Townsmen in the Making, Makerere: East Africa Institute of Social Research.

Spencer, J. with Tuxfors, J. and Dennis, N. (1964) Stress and Release in an Urban Estate, London: Tavistock.

Stacey, M. (1960) Tradition and Change. A study of Banbury, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stacey, M. Batstone, E., Bell, C. & Murcott, A. (1975) Power, Persistence and Change. A second study of Banbury, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Strathern, M. (1981) Kinship at the Core. An anthropology of Elmdon, Essex, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Strathern, M.(1982) 'The village as idea: constructs of villageness in Elmdon, Essex, in A. P. Cohen (ed.) Belonging. Identity and social organisation in British rural cultures, Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J.(1990) Basics of Qualitative Research. Grounded theory procedures and technique, Newbury Park, California: Sage.

Vidich, A. J. and Bensman, J.(1958) Small Town in Mass Society. Class, power, and religion in a rural community (1960 edn), New York: Anchor Doubleday

Waddington, D., Wykes, M. and Critcher, C. (1990) Split and the Seams? Community, continuity and change after the 1984 coal dispute, Buckingham: Open University Press.

Warner, W. Lloyd, and Lunt, P. S. (1941) The Social Life of a Modern Community. Yankee City Series Volume I, New Haven: Yale University Press.

Whyte, W. F. (1943) Street Corner Society. The social structure of an Italian slum, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Whyte, W. F. (1955) Street Corner Society (2nd ed.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Wilson, G. (1941) An Essay on the Economics of Destabilization in Northern Rhodesia, Lusaka: Rhodes-Livingstone Institute.

Wirth, L. (1938) 'Urbanism as a way of life', American Journal of Sociology 44: 1-24.

Wright, S. (1992) 'Image and analysis: new directions in community studies' in B. Short (ed.) The English Rural Community. Image and analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Young, M. and Willmott, P. (1957) Family and Kinship in East London (rev. edn 1962), Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Zorbaugh, H. W. (1929) The Gold Coast and the Slum, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

community schools

Impington Village College

A great deal has been written about the community school - however, much of the literature tends to be repetitive and highly descriptive. What we find are endless accounts of how this school or that project was a great success - often written by the headteacher. No adequate attempt to provide a history exists (although one is about appear from Tony Jeffs); nor is it possible to find a sustained critique of practice.
What is a community school?

In a review of the literature, Tony Jeffs identifies some possible characteristics of a community school:

Openness: Advocates tend to define community schools by what they are not rather than what they are. Community schools, we are told, offer an alternative to so 'much that is narrow, segregating, and inflexible in the traditional school' (Jackson 1980: 40); that they are not closed and insular but 'open'. Indeed according to Finch (1980: 224) 'it has to be an open school' or it ceases to be a community school. This notion of 'openness' cannot isn't just at the level of rhetoric - it influences classroom practice, administrative process and the design of purpose-built community schools. Examples include:-

*

absence of fences or walls keeping students in and the public out;
*

retention or creation of public rights of way passing through the school site (in some cases the building itself) and placing the school astride natural thoroughfares between estates or neighbourhoods;
*

locating public utilities i.e. shops, libraries, job shops, leisure facilities, on campus;
*

building on central rather than peripheral sites i.e. adjacent to the market square;
*

open plan teaching areas.

Fusing: Simply being 'open' is not perceived to be the ultimate aim. Halsey (1972), Poster (1976) and Toogood (1984) all stress that ultimately the school should fuse with the community. Toogood talks of the need for schools 'to explode into the community' (1984: 78); Midwinter (1973: 56) of the two blending serenely together; whilst Halsey claims that

the community school seeks to obliterate the boundary between school and community, to turn the community into a school and the school into a community. (Halsey 1972: 79) .

Sharing, collaboration. Besides openness and fusion it is possible it identify other 'persistent ideas' (Wallis and Mee 1983) and distinguishing 'elements' (Nisbet et al 1980) in the literature. All are embedded within distinctive forms of practice which promulgated by the community school movement.

For many people community schools are synominous with the idea of shared facilities and collaboration with other agencies and groups. The classic example here is the school that that gains additional monies by agreeing to open up its sporting facilities for use by local people. For many local authorities, especially in local areas, the idea that capital and running costs for expensive plant could be shared was attractive.

Linked to this are two associated ideas

*

encouraging collaboration with statutory and voluntary welfare agencies; and
*

the development of the school as a resource base for social and community action.

Democratization: A further element in some of the rhetoric (but less of the practise) is the idea that community schooling involves the democratisation of internal structures and creation of mechanisms for the external community to influence school policy. Examples of this would be the development of schools councils involving students and staff; the fostering of various parents groups; and even suggestions that the school needs to be regarded more as a sort of community association with the governing body including representatives of all the key stakeholders.

Curricula innovation: The above notions have obvious knock-on effects for the way the curriculum could be approached in such schools. Ideas of 'fusing' and sharing may encourage people to look to the local community or neighbourhood as a key reference point in building the curriculum. this was certainly the line advocated by Midwinter in the Liverpool experiment in the early 1970s. Here the idea was that curricula innovation was needed to ensure heightened relevance for students and opportunities for increased linkages with the wider community.

To these characteristics we can add a further two:

Lifelong education: There is also an abiding idea that schooling should not be just for children - it should be open to all. We can see great echoes of Basil Yeaxlee talked of as lifelong education in what Henry Morris has to say of his vision of the Village College:

As the community centre of the neighbourhood it would provide for the whole man, and abolish the duality of education and ordinary life. It would not only be the training ground for the art of living, but the place in which life is lived, the environment of a genuine corporate life. The dismal dispute of vocational and non-vocational education would not arise in it. It would be a visible demonstration in stone of the continuity and never ceasingness of education. There would be no 'leaving school'! - the child would enter at three and leave the college only in extreme old age. It would have the virtue of being local so that it would enhance the quality of actual life as it is lived from day to day - the supreme object of education... It would not be divorced from the normal environment of those who would frequent it from day to day, or from that great educational institution, the family... The village college could lie athwart the daily lives of the community it served; and in it the conditions would be realised under which education would not be an escape from reality, but an enrichment and transformation of it. For education is committed to the view that the ideal order and the actual order can ultimately be made one. (Morris 1925: Section XIV).

Schools as self financing production units: In a number of southern countries this can be added as a further characteristic. One approach is were the school produces a commodity, e.g. rice or livestock, and then sells that on the open market. Another is that the production of services is rendered by the school to the community in return for payment, e.g. harvesting, transportation of goods, soil cultivation, etc. (Hawes and Stephens 1990).

Now just to what extent these characteristics are present in any one school is a matter for some debate. Many carry the title community school or college with only a nod in the direction of these ideas. But these notions do provide a useful benchmark for debate.
The development of the community school

British and Irish writers tend to identify Henry Morris as the founder of the community school viewing the publication of The Village College. Being a Memorandum on the Provision of Educational and Social Facilities for the Countryside, with Special Reference to Cambridgeshire (Morris - 1925) as when the idea took flight; and the opening of Sawston Village College, in 1930 as when it acquired substance. American counterparts with similar confidence, unanimity and parochialism, maintain:

Between 1932 and 1935 ... Frank Manley, physical education and recreation supervisor in the Flint (Michigan) public schools, presented some ideas on how the schools could begin to solve various community problems, Mr Mott (a local philanthropist) agreed to help. Thus, in 1935 the Mott Foundation contributed an initial $6.000 to the Flint Public Schools for purposes of a greater utilization of the school facilities and the community school concept was born. (Hiemstra 1972: 34-35)

Actually, as Jeffs points out in his new book- neither are correct - we need to look back to Robert Owen and New Lanark, and to other pioneers in the nineteenth century. From this point it is possible to identify a number of overlapping phases in the development of community schooling:

Early experimentation: Robert Owen, William Lovett and N. F. S. Grundtvig:The development of the New Institute and New Lanark (1816) by Owen, educational developments such as the National Hall (1842) under the influence of Lovett; and the growth of Folk High Schools in Denmark through the work of Grundtvig.

The emergence of 'dual use': In Britain, during the second half of the nineteenth century many Board and Church schools operated in ways that would qualify them today for 'community status'. As Jeffs (1994) has identified, in some rural areas schools were designed to serve also as a place of worship and as a community centre. Examples also exist of schools providing a venue for social activities, adult education programmes, 'return-to-learning' classes for ex-pupils and sponsoring welfare services such as second-hand clothes stores, health clinics, meals, youth provision and summer play programmes. Dual use of school premises had been growing in the USA since the first recorded example of a purpose-built unit in 1810. Prior to 1900 the term community school was already in use, especially in rural areas, where school boards provided land, extensions and facilities for community usage (Jeffs 1994). In 1907 community centers based on schools were started in Rochester, New York in 1907 under the direction of Edward J. Ward - and became popular in other localities (see community centres).

Village colleges / the Flint experiments: With the development of village colleges in Cambridgeshire under the leadership of Henry Morris in the 1930s and Frank Manley's innovations in Flint, Michigan funded by the Mott Foundation at a similar time we see the establishment of 'benchmark' institutions and programmes within state systems. The latter provided many of the defining features of the community schools and colleges that appeared in England in the early 1970s. This included the development of a range of communal facilities on school sites, and some shifts in the way that schools were governed and run.

Expansion - community colleges and compensatory education: There were two war waves of community schooling in Britain in the second half of the twentieth century. The first was an expansion in rural and suburban areas - the best known of which being Stewart Mason's (1949) work in Leicestershire; and then, in the aftermath of the Plowden Report (1967), their appearance in inner-city localities. Here the work of Eric Midwinter (1972; 1973) was especially influential. (See also Halsey 1972).

Community schools as schools built and run by communities for communities: Community schooling has developed in a number of southern countries as an alternative to more expensive forms of provision for basic education (see community education and development). Hawes and Stephens (1990) review some of these developments and look to the shape and programme of institutions; teachers as animateurs; and schools as self financing production units.

Full-service schooling and the 'new community schools': In the late 1970's and early 1980s there were a number of innovative school-based health programmes that have developed into something of a movement in the United States. However, elements of what now passes for full-service schooling have been a part of practice in the USA for a number of years. The primary model put forward by Dryfoos is that of the school-based health and social services centre: ‘space set aside in a school building where services are brought in by outside community agencies in conjunction with school personnel' (1994: 142). They are to be ‘one stop, collaborative institutions’ (ibid.: 13) (see full-service schooling). The notion has been picked up in Scotland in the form of new community schools - and is informing discussion of the place of the school in urban regeneration and raising educational achievement in England (see, for example, the learning mentor initiative).
Selected texts

The bulk of the general texts are edited collections, the content of which is a little variable, but each has its strengths. Of the others, Wallis and Mee (1983) is a useful, but now dated, research study; Cowburn (1986) provides an overview of English developments and then moves into the exploration of case studies; and Poster (1982) follows a wider review of developments with a focus on management. All of which adds up to a large gap in the literature which, hopefully, should be filled by Tony Jeffs' forthcoming study of community schooling. I have included Hargreaves' important (1982) discussion of comprehensive schooling as its focus overlaps with the concerns of a number of the writers listed here.
Overviews of community schooling

Allen, G. et al. (eds.) (1987) Community Education: An agenda for educational reform, Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Substantial collection of variable material which attempts to clarify key ideas, critically examine aspects of practice and explore elements of the personal and political in practice. [Out of print].

Allen, G. and Martin, I. (eds.) (1992) Education and Community. The politics of practice, London: Cassell. 152 + viii pages. Part one critiques various aspects of community education; part two examines a number of different aspects of practice including access, parental involvement, LEA policies, community care and networking; part three explores education, community and citizenship.

Clark, D. (1996) Schools as Learning Communities. Transforming education, London: Cassell. Examines the nature of community education and the process of communualizing education. Argues for the development of a 'new curriculum code' that is 'synergistic' (bring community and education together). As the title suggests it is still school-focused.

Cowburn, W. (1986) Class, Ideology and Community Education, Beckenham: Croom Helm. 235 + xiv pages. Critique of community education and community schools; and an exploration of possibilities for adult education. Defines community education to describe those 'mainstream educational changes being organized around community schools and community colleges' (p.3). Uses several case studies. [Out of print].

Fletcher, C. and Thompson, N. (eds.) (1980) Issues in Community Education, Lewes: Falmer Press. 214 pages. An examination of developments in community education upto the 1980s. Includes material on some key tensions and descriptions of practice.

Hargreaves, D. H. (1982) The Challenge for the Comprehensive School. Culture, curriculum and community, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul 244 + x pages. Important discussion of comprehensive schooling. Hargreaves argues that a fairer society can only be achieved if we make a fundamental reappraisal of the comprehensive school curriculum and the UK system of public examinations. This, in turn, requires a fundamental rethink of the organization of schooling and the nature of the teaching profession. Chapters on the two curricula of schooling; the decline of community; examinations and the curriculum; the culture of individualism; the curriculum and the community; a proposal and some objections; the culture of teaching; and teachers and the future.

Nisbet, J., Hendry, L., Stewart, C. and Watt, J. (1980) Towards Community Education. An evaluation of community schools, Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press. 136 pages. Major study of community education in Grampian Region. They argue that community education has six distinctive elements: mutually supportive relationships between school and community; shared facilities; community-oriented curriculum; lifelong education; community involvement in decision-making and management; community development. [Out of print].

O'Hagan, B. (1991) The Charnwood Papers. Fallacies in community education, Ticknall: Education Now. Explores a number of fallacies concerning policy, the subversiveness of community development, positive discrimination, non-directiveness, the school as a site for youth work, home-school partnerships, national curriculum and power.

Poster, C. (1971) The School and the Community, London: Macmillan. 126 pages. Introductory text that traces the history of community education (basically starting with folk high schools and village colleges); argues for the significance of community education; and explores different ways in which schools can relate to their local communities. Examines youth work, adult education; and, then, new developments.

Poster, C. (1982) Community Education: its development and management, London: Heinemann. 184 + viii pages. The first half of the book is a discussion of the development of community education in England from Morris onwards. One chapter surveys 'overseas' developments. The second half explores different management issues.

Street, P. (1997) Managing Schools in the Community, Aldershot: Arena. 184 + xi pages. Examines the management implications for developing community involvement in schools. Includes some guidance on how this can be achieved. Chapters on the nature of community schools; going community; planning for action; a living community school; school and the community; management plans and budget management; paying the bills; 'smooth operation'. Basically a 'how to do it' book with checklists and advice.

Wallis, J. and Mee, G. (1983) Community Schools. Claims and performance, Nottingham: University of Nottingham. 81 pages. Brief survey of the area based on a literature review and empirical work. Sets out some questions, discusses some definitions, and examines the curriculum and work patterns of adult/community educators.
Case studies of community schools

I have chosen case studies that are both interesting in what they describe, and that add to our theoretical understanding. This narrowed down the number of texts rather sharply. Each of the books chosen has its shortcomings - but are worth seeking out.

Bremer, J. and von Moschzisker, M. (1971) The School Without Walls. Philadelphia's Parkway Program,New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 295 + xiv pages. Account of the early days of an experimental programme to establish a high school based in various agencies and institutions in the city. There was no centralised building; students formed self-governing groups which met for regular tutorials and meetings. They were responsible for choosing their own curricula and were taught by business people, workers, city officials, parents, and librarians where they worked. The 'school' library was the public library; and might go down the road for 'maths' in a local business. The emphasis was on self-directed learning. There are chapters on organization, curriculum, faculty, a student's day, evaluation, finance, history.

Carspecken, P. F. (1991) Community Schooling and the Nature of Power. The battle for Croxteth Comprehensive. London: Routledge. 212 + xiv pages. Account of the struggle for control of the school (1982-84) interlaced with analysis. He examines the perceptions of the different actors and participants; issues in the control of schooling (the role of teachers, students, local community members, politicians etc.); and the energy and knowledge necessary for radical projects.

Gordon, T. (1986) Democracy in One School? Progressive education and restructuring, Lewes: Falmer. 278 + viii pages. Study of an English Community School (Countesthorpe). Chapters examine formal education as state apparatus; restructuring, resistance and the development of schooling; progressive education; the nature of the school and its participants; individualization and professionalization; student careers; sex-gender and sexism; vertical teams. The interactions and tensions in an experiment such as this make for interesting reading. Useful to read alongside an edited collection put together by the Principal: Watts, J. 1977) The Countesthorpe Experience. The first five years., London: Unwin Education. 217 pages. Contains contributions by students, staff, local people, and outside observers.

Holmes, G. (1952) The Idiot Teacher. A book about Prestolee School and its headmaster E. F. O'Neill, London; Faber and Faber. 200 pages. Affectionate and insightful account of O'Neill's extraordinary time (1918 - 1951) at Prestoless Elementary School (for students aged 3-15) at Farnworth, Lancashire. As well as transforming the routines and rituals of schooling into a community with an emphasis on self-activity, O'Neill was able to work with local people to develop a play centre (with magic garden), youth centre and community centre.

Smith, L. M., Prunty, J. P., Dwyer, D. C. and Kleine, P. F. (1987) The Fate of an Innovative School, Lewes: Falmer. Major study of an American 'innovative' school that pays attention to its relationships with local communities.
References

Burton, H. M. (1943) The Education of the, Countryman, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner.

Dryfoos, J. (1994) Full –Service Schools. A revolution in health and social services for children, youth and families, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Finch, E. (1980) 'The Open School' in A. Fairbairn (ed.) The Leicestershire Experience, London: Heinemann.

Fletcher, C. (1984) The Challenges of Community Education, Nottingham: Nottingham University Dept of Adult Education.

Halsey, A. H. (1972) Educational Priority Volume 1: EPA problems and policies, London: HMSO.

Hawes, H. and Stephens, D. (1990) Questions of Quality. Primary education and development, London Routledge.

Hiemstra, R. (1972) The Educative Community: Linking the Community, School and Family, Lincoln, Nebraska: Professional Educators Publications.

j-morris.jpg (4454 bytes)Jeffs, T. (1999) Henry Morris. Village colleges, community education and the ideal order, Ticknall: Educational Heretics Press.

Mason, S. (1949) Community Education, Paper submitted to Leicestershire Education Committee April 1949.

Midwinter, E. (1972) Priority Education. An account of the Liverpool Project, Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Midwinter, E. (1973) Patterns of Community Education, London: Ward Lock.

Moller, J. C. and Watson, K. (1944) Education in Democracy: The Folk High Schools of Denmark, London: Faber.

Morris, H. (1925) The Village College: Being a Memorandum On the Provision of Educational and Social facilities For the Countryside, With Special Reference to Cambridgeshire, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. See the archives.

Nisbet, J., Hendry, L., Stewart, C. and Watt, J. (1980) Towards Community Education: An Evaluation of Community Schools, Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.

Pluckrose, H. (1975) Open School, Open Society, London: Evans Brothers.

Poster, C. (1982) Community Education: its Development and Management, London: Heinemann.

Rée, H. (1973) Educator Extraordinary: The Life and Achievements of Henry Morris, London: Longmans.

Rennie, J. (1985) British Community Primary Schools: Four Case Studies, Lewes: Falmer.

Seaborne, M. and Lowe, R. (1977) The English School: Its Architecture and Organization - 1870 - 1970, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Sharp, J. (1973) Open School, London: Dent.

Swainson, D. (1985) The Management of Rural Community Schools, Taunton: Somerset County Council.

Toogood, P. (1984) The Head's Tale, Telford: Dialogue Publications.

Wallis, J. and Mee, G. (1983) Community Schools: Claims and Performances, Nottingham: University of Nottingham Dept of Adult Education.

Watts, J. (1980) Towards An Open School, London: Longman.