To assist the Agency for International Development in its decision-making process, a matrix which links sets of conditions in developing nations with appropriate types of educational development was produced. Key issues in the creation and use of typologies are discussed and standards for evaluating typologies are identified. Four typological research studies--Beeby (evolutionary), Harbison and Myers (neo-evolutionary), Adams and Farrell (structural differentiation), and McGinn and Snodgrass (structural functional)--are described and assessed. How to build upon and extend these earlier works is discussed. The new framework presented has three major components: the normative or presentation of ranked goals; the analytical or criteria for choice; and the contextual or local-specific characteristics. How each of these components can be loaded with data from appropriate sources is discussed. The concluding section discusses implications of the framework for policy and application. (RM)