This thesis attempts to answer five main questions. What were the problems of the control and administration of the training colleges between the McNair and Robbins Reports which caused the colleges to place such great importance on the Robbins' proposals for changes in the system? Why were the Robbins' recommendations rejected? Why was there a controversy over the membership of the Weaver Study Group? Why did the Weaver Report and the Education (No. 2) Act, 1968, take the form they did? What part did the A.T.C.D.E. play in these developments? Chapter 1 outlines the framework of the system of control and administration of the colleges and the changes that were taking place in the system between 1944-61. Against this background, Chapter 2 traces the development of A.T.C.D.E. policies and the reactions of representatives of the providing bodies to the policies. Chapter 3 examines the evidence of the main interested parties to the Robbins Committee, the Committee's proposals and the lines of the impending debate. Chapter 4 analyses the reasons for the rejection of the Robbins’ proposals. Chapter 5 discusses the controversy over the membership of the Weaver Study Group. Chapter 6 presents a detailed analysis of the main issues within the Weaver Study Group. Chapter 7 describes the initial action taken on the Weaver Report and the causes of the A.T.C.D.E.'s growing concern with the response of sane L.E.As to the Weaver Report. Chapter 8 follows the passage of the House of Lords’ Bill through the Lords and Commons and the A.T.C.D.E.'s campaign to secure the most generous interpretation of the Weaver proposals and that instruments as well as articles of government should be subject to the Secretary of State's approval.