Should govt control textbooks?

By Hermawan Sulistyo

JAKARTA (JP): The Indonesian Publishers Association (IKAPI) will hold its annual exhibition from June 14 to June 21. While book publishing is in a grim situation here, publishers have recognized that one thing that keeps it from collapsing is the provision of school textbooks. It is therefore interesting to consider whether government interference is indeed the best strategy to deal with textbook publishing.

The United States' publishing industry is generally considered to be driven by the free market, without government interference. This is partially true of elementary and high school textbook publishing because decisions are made by government bodies, such as state textbook adoption committees (in the states of California and Texas, for example).

In contrast, communist systems such as China provide the best example of the government's control over textbooks. But, as in the case of the U.S. free market system, reference to China as adopting a full state-controlled system is only partially true since students are forced to buy or subsidize the textbooks.

Let's take a closer look at some advantages of the free market system. In educational terms, the short cycle of products (between five to six years) forces textbook publishers to refine the contents of the textbooks. This benefits the educational process in a sense that students are provided with an opportunity to catch up with the latest developments in science and technology.

A similar effect resulting from this situation appears in a broader context. Economic competition forces textbook publishers to produce the best textbooks possible, or otherwise the consumers (teachers and students) will turn to other products. The free market also forces an entanglement of the textbook industry with the publishing industry as a whole. A positive result of this economic web is shown by the World Bank's projects in Lesotho.

Another advantage comes from the political side. Politically, the "fragmented" contents of a textbook could serve broader interests. A political consensus among various groups becomes viable in maintaining a resilient social order. This is true in the case of a plural and heterogeneous society, such as in California.

There are also many disadvantages of the free market system for the provision of textbooks. Publishing decisions are basically made by the publishers who determine the structure and content of the curriculum. This situation in the U.S. started as a result of the educational reform movement in the 1950s. The movement succeeded in reversing the course of education, from the structure of curricula determining textbooks' contents to textbooks determining the structure of curricula and also the students' knowledge.

This raises a difficult moral aspect. The indisputable fact is that textbook publishers are profit-making institutions. The dilemma facing the U.S. free market system is how can a profit seeker be accountable for attaining educational goals? Studies of the U.S. system have proven that multigraded textbooks, used at primary school level, have quite a similar structure and content. If this is so, then why not adopt a national system?

A free market system also creates a high risk business in which only the big publishers will survive and benefit. Although there is always an opportunity to fill local needs by "niche publishers", in reality this rarely happens. The principle of "survival of the fittest" applies even at the bottom of the foundations of education.

In political terms, too much political interest could result in an unending conflict of interest, which would put aside educational considerations. Political interests will then lead the course of education. The ballot on the abolishment of affirmative action principle in California illustrates this situation.

So why not adopt a system that allows government control? Proponents of this system argue that education should be connected to the nation's goals and ideals. Therefore, to control the provision of textbooks means to set up a nation building tool in a larger framework. In this way, textbooks are considered a way to strengthen nationalism, or the "imagined community", to borrow a term from Benedict Anderson. A praxis derived from this conception is that a national system can be set up.

In an economic sense, government control means the protection of monopoly by big publishers and the provision of ample opportunities for related smaller businesses. It will also be easier to have a uniformed system in terms of production, warehousing, and distribution. But in countries where business is dominated by family circles related to bureaucrats such as China or Indonesia, the result is always a monopoly by these family circles.

In terms of education, government control does not allow diverse sources or interest. Economically, only two cases in all of the World Bank's projects have succeeded in continuing this strategy. Projects in the Philippines and Indonesia have completely failed.

Considering the advantages and disadvantages of government interference in the provision of textbooks, it is clear there is no pure system in either extreme. The World Bank's projects also concluded that this mix is the best solution to the problems facing the textbook industry. But the issue of how deeply the government should interfere in this issue remains.

The writer holds a Ph.D in Scholarly Publishing from Arizona State University. He is now a researcher with the Center for Political and Area Studies, the Indonesian Institute of Sciences.

Window: Therefore, to control the provision of textbooks means to set up a nation building tool in a larger framework.