to be spelled out in operationally meaningful terms, and that it has to evolve according to the changing circumstances in each area. By way of illustration, six types of the minimum learning needs have been described in general terms--not as a prescription for educational programs anywhere, because no such general prescription makes sense. 5. The authors deplore the replication of "the Westernized, industrialized societies' model" and try to look beyond for alternatives. I draw the readers' attention to the discussion of indigenous learning systems, the imported models, and the recent home-grown models (pp.41-45) and the references to the cases. The authors, instead of advocating more of the usual youth clubs and Boy Scouts, bemoan their inability to reach and help those groups that are most deprived and neglected educationally in the existing system (p.57). 6. The inappropriateness of the standard four stages of human development as a basis for organizing learning, contrary to the reviewer's assertion, finds application in the suggestions for exploring alternative approaches to formal primary education (pp.88-90) and in the general rejection of the rigidly graded and age-specific educational programs. 7. The importance of defining and choosing the right priorities and objectives of rural development and the need for viewing the educational efforts as a part of the larger development process are stressed at several points (e.g., pp.20-24, 72, 75, 78, 92-93). I am in full agreement with the reviewer's basic argument, but I must point out that this book is not a treatise on the national development process and, therefore, anyone looking for such a treatise in this book will be disappointed; but those who are looking for some practical and feasible steps that countries and external agencies can take to improve the educational situation in the rural areas of the less developed countries may find the book of some use.

Note 1 p. H. Coombs with M. Ahmed, Attacking Rural Poverty--How Non/orrnal Education Can Help, prepared for the World Bank (Baltimore, Mr.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974); BuiMing New Educational Strategies to Serve Rural Children and Youth, ICED's second report to UNICEF, now in draft (to be published in early 1975).

Reply by David Smith Well, the rejoinder is of a piece with the book. Its primary difficulty is that the authors are locked into the frameworks, patterns, approaches that are part of the problem. Some of my unhappiness in writing the review in the first place lay in the uneasy knowledge that the authors also are not unaware of this difficulty. As they so rightly say in their comments, "educational processes and outcomes [are] intimately intertwined with social, political, and economic forces and very often the ira74

balances and inequities of societies [are] aided and abetted by the educational system." I did not ask for, and I don't think the authors were equipped, or in a position, to provide "a prescription for national revolution," but, given the very good beginning (pp.20-24), I expressed regret that the authors did not extend their critique of national development policies. Without this critique to supply direction and insight the "feasible reforms" they envisage will sputter out without catching fire. Moreover, I thought this kind of critique would prove very useful to local leaders in the developing countries, who may not, for a variety of reasons, be in a position to make a public case against the usual development priorities. In addition, I think this critique should be linked to sharper educational analysis. If education for lifelong learning is ever to become more than empty rhetoric or merely a truism there will have to be some significant changes in basic educational propositions. For example, we'll have to agree, if education is for lifelong learning, that the curriculum must be determined by the student. This is a proposition that, if applied, would shake up the establishment! And would make very good sense in the developing countries. On the other hand, having re-read pages 41-45 and beyond, I'll agree my review may have been less than fair and I'll look forward to the production of the group of case studies of home-grown models of educational innovation. And, as I stated in my review, hopefully we'll get an accompanying analysis that will provide interpretation and insight. I must add, however, that the fact the Government of India liked the book sufficiently to ask for permission to reprint 3,000 copies for distribution to its staff would scare, rather than reassure, me. This same Government of India could think of no better way to handle its striking railway workers than to put them in jail and it was this government that, in spite of the misery and poverty of its people, was prepared to spend its limited resources to build the bomb.