¹ For an excellent analysis of the shallowness of this approach see Glazer's, Nathan critical review of the US Commission on Civil Rights Report, ‘A Breakdown in Civil Rights Enforcement?’, Public Interest (Spring 1971), pp. 106–15.Google Scholar

² A few examples of studies along these lines are presented in Eaton, Joseph W. and Gilbert, Neil, ‘Racial Discrimination and Diagnostic Differentiation’, Race, Research and Reason, Miller, Roger (ed.), New York: National Association of Social Workers, 1969, pp. 79–88.Google Scholar

³ Cloward, Richard and Epstein, Irwin, ‘Private Social Welfare's Disengagement from the Poor: The Case of Family Adjustment Agencies’, Social Welfare Institutions, Zald, Mayer (ed.), New York: John Wiley, 1965, pp. 623–44Google Scholar; and Bredemeier, Harry, ‘The Socially Handicapped and the Agencies: A Market Analysis’, Mental Health of the Poor, Reissman, Frank, Cohen, Jerome, and Pearl, Arthur (eds), New York: The Free Press, 1964.Google Scholar

⁴ For example see Marshall, Ray and Brigges, Vernon Jr, Remedies for Discrimination in Apprenticeship Programs, New York: Joint Apprenticeship Program, n.d.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Dubinsky, Irwin, ‘Trade Union Discrimination in the Pittsburgh Construction: How and Why it Operates’, Urban Affairs Quarterly (03 1971), pp. 297–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵ On this point, Bell, Daniel has observed, ‘The controlling problem of governance of universities in the 1970's will be the resolution of a crisis in legitimacy, in the definition of authority which justifies any use of power or command.’Google Scholar See ‘Quo Warranto? – Notes on the Governance of Universities in the 1970's’, Public Interest (Spring 1970), pp. 53–68.Google Scholar

⁶ This view of the university is set forth in John, and Erlich, Susan (eds), Student Power, Participation and Revolution, New York: Association Press, 1970, pp. 41–84.Google Scholar

⁷ Various proposals for these programmes are described in Gary, Lawrence E., ‘Social Work Education and the Black Community: A Proposal for Curriculum Revisions’, Ethnic Minorities in Social Work Education, Scott, Carl (ed.), New York: Council on Social Work Education, 1970, pp. 77–89Google Scholar; Robertson, Mary Ella, ‘Inclusion of Content on Ethnic Minorities in the Social Work Curriculum’, Social Work Education Reporter (03 1970), pp. 45–7Google Scholar; Arnold, Howard, ‘American Racism: Implications for Social Work’, Journal of Social Work Education (Autumn 1970), pp. 7–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Turner, John, ‘Education for Practice with Minorities’, Social Work (05 1972), pp. 112–18Google Scholar; Averbach, Arnold, ‘Quotas in Schools of Social Work’, Social Work (03 1972), pp. 102–5Google Scholar; Pruger, Robert, ‘The Objectives of Ethnic Curriculum Content: A Critical Review’, School of Social Welfare, University of California, Berkeley, June 1972 (mimeographed).Google Scholar

⁸ For a detailed analysis of preferential treatment and its implications see Gilbert, Neil and Eaton, Joseph, ‘Favoritism as a Strategy in Race Relations’, Social Problems (Summer 1970), pp. 38–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹ Fleming, Macklin and Pollack, Louis, ‘The Black Quota at Yale Law School: An Exchange of Letters’, Public Interest (Spring 1970), pp. 44–52Google Scholar; Seabury, Paul, ‘How Washington Enforces New Forms of Discrimination in the Name of Equal Opportunity’, Commentary (February 1972), pp. 38–44.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Sowell, Thomas, ‘Colleges Are Skipping Over Competent Blacks to Admit “Authentic” Ghetto Types’, New York Times Magazine, 13 12 1970, p. 36.Google Scholar