THE FULTON COMMITTEE AND THE‘PREFERENCE FOR RELEVANCE ISSUE

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Early access to the papers of the Fulton committee of 1966‐8, and to the still unpublished oral evidence that the committee received, which has been officially granted to the author, enables the issue of ‘preferences for relevance’ in the directentry recruitment of administrators, which divided the committee, to be studied fully for the first time. This study is complemented by interviews with the surviving members of the committee and with members of its secretariat. It demonstrates that the evidence and the debate about ‘preference for relevance’ had a different balance from that which the previously published material suggested. The bulk of the evidence was anti‐pathetic to ‘preference for relevance’ with many ministers being among the conservatives. The majority of the committee was radical but a substantial minority favoured ‘traditional’ arraqgements with professionalized post‐entry training. Ironically, what eventually emerged was traditionalism without substantial training which nobody on the committee, and only a small number of those giving evidence, favoured.

This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit: