This paper endeavours to make sense of the various ways in which textbooks have been analysed in India, and the manner in which their goodness or worth is ascertained, based on an exhaustive review of published and unpublished studies. It examines the evolution of criteria for textbook analysis and some of the concerns raised by important policy documents. Researches are classified into three broad type: text, text and the psychological world of the learner, text and the context, based on the extent to which they move beyond the text itself, to include additional dimensions of learner characteristics, classroom and social context. A conceptual framework is presented which could serve to enable future researchers in this field to locate their particular approach as well as relate it to other dimensions while determining ‘goodness’ of text and its pedagogic significance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AcharyaP. (1981, June13). Politics of primary education in West Bengal: The case of sahaj path. Economic and Political Weekly, 16(24), 1069–1075.
2.
AdvaniS. (1996, August3). Educating the national imagination. Economic and Political Weekly, 31(31), 2077–2082.
3.
AdvaniS. (2004). Pedagogy and politics: The case of English textbooks. In ChatterjeeA. (Ed.), Education and democracy in India. New Delhi: Manohar.
4.
AgnihotriR. K. (1990). A socio–psychological perspective on reading ability: The case of a Hindi Social Science textbook. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 57–73.
5.
AgnihotriR. K. (2002). Understanding pedagogical interventions: DPEP in Tamil Nadu—A draftUdaipur: Vidhya Bhawan Society.
6.
AndersonT. H.ArmbrusterΒ. B. (1984). Content area textbooks. In AndersonR. C.OsbornJ.TierneyR. J. (Eds.), Learning to read in American schools (pp. 193–224). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7.
AndersonR. C.HeibertE. H.ScottJ. A.WilkinsonI. A. G. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: The report of the commission on reading. Washington D.C.: The National Academy of Education.
8.
AppleM. (1982). Ideology and curriculum. London & New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
9.
ArmbrusterB. (1984). The problem of inconsiderate text. In DuffyG. G.RoehlerL. R.ReasonJ. (Eds.), Comprehending instruction: Perspectives and suggestions. New York: Longman.
10.
BarlettF. C. (1932). Remembering. Cambridge: The University Press.
11.
BatraP. (2002). Evaluation of pedagogical interventions under the phase I programme of DPEP in the state of Haryana-Draft Report. Delhi: Central Institute of Education.
12.
BatraP. (Ed.). (2010). Social Science learning in schools: Perspectives and challenges. New Delhi: Sage Publication.
13.
BatraP.NawaniD. (2010). Social Science texts: A pedagogic perspective. In BatraP. (Ed.), Social Science learning in schools: Perspectives and challenges. New Delhi: Sage Publication.
14.
BhogD. (2002, April27). Gender and curriculum. Economic and Political Weekly, 37(17), 1638–1642.
15.
BourdieuP.PassersonJ. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: Sage Publications.
BuchM. B. (1974). First survey of research in education. Baroda: Centre of Advanced Study in Education.
18.
BuchM. B. (1979). Second survey of research in education. Baroda: Society for Educational Research and Development.
19.
BuchM. B. (1986). Third survey of research in education, 1778–1783. New Delhi: NCERT.
20.
BuchM. B. (1991). Fourth survey of research in education, 1983–1988, (Volumes I & II). New Delh: NCERT.
21.
BurteP. (2001). Maharashtratil Marathi madhyamachi shaleya pathyapustake— Ek mulyatmak abhyas. Bhopal: Eklavya Prakashan.
22.
ChandraB. (1970). Modern India. New Delhi: NCERT.
23.
CunningsworthA. (1979). Evaluating course materials. In HoldenS. (Ed.), Teacher training (pp. 31–33). Oxford: Modern English Publications.
24.
DaleE.ChallJ.G. (1949). The concept of readability. Elementary English, 26, 19–26.
25.
DewanH. K. (2002). A Study of pedagogical intervention under DPEP, Karnataka. Udalpur: Vidya Bhawan Society.
26.
DhankarR. (2002). A Study of pedagogical intervention under DPEP Kerala— Summary of findings. Jaipur: Digantar.
27.
DreherM. J.SingerH. (1989). Friendly texts and text-friendly teachers. Theory into Practice, 28(2), 98–104.
28.
DurkinD. (1987). Teaching young children to read (4th). USA: Allyn and Bacon Inc.
29.
GardnerR. CLambertW. (1959). Motivational variables in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13, 266–272.
30.
GeorgeA. M. (2004). Children’s perception of Sarkar: The fallacies of Civics teaching. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 1(2), 228–257.
31.
GoelB. S.SharmaJ. D. (1984). A study of evolution of the textbook, New Delhi: NCERT.
32.
GrayW. S.LearyB. E. (1935). What makes a book: readable?Chicago: University of Chicago.
33.
HaqEhsanul. (1976). Sociology of curriculum: The role of school textbooks in nation building. Indian Educational Review, 2(1), 75–80.
34.
HusenT.PosthewaiteT. N. (Ed.) (1985) The International encyclopaedia of educationLondon: Pegamon.
35.
JainM. (2004). Civics, citizens and human Rights: Civics discourse in India. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 1(2), 165–198.
36.
KakarS. (1971). The theme of authority in social relations in India. The Journal of Social Psychology, 84, 93–101.
37.
KaliaN. N. (1979). Sexism in Indian education. New Delhi: Vikas.
38.
KaliaN. N. (1980). Images of men and women in Indian textbooks. Comparative Education. Review, 24(2), 209–223.
39.
KaulV.GuptaD.BalaN.BarbhuiyaA. RRaoN.MallikarjunB. (1995). Readability of primary level textbooks. New Delhi: Department of Pre-School and Elementary Education, NCERT. (Mimeo).
40.
KaulV.GuptaD.GuptaV. P.VarmaS.Neerubala. (1998). Text books with a difference: A study of two DPEP experiments. Department of Pre-School and Elementary Education. New Delhi: NCERT. (Mimeo).
41.
KrugM. M. (1960). Safe textbooks and citizenship education. The School Review, 68(4), 463–480.
42.
KumarK. (1989). Social character of learning. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
43.
KumarK. (1991). Political agenda of education: A study of colonialist and nationalist ideas. New Delhi: Sage.
44.
KumarK. (2001). Prejudice and pride: School histories of the freedom struggle in India and Pakistan. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
45.
LittlejohnA. (1998). The analysis of language teaching materials: Inside the Trojan horse. In TomlinsonB. (Ed.), Materials development in Language teaching (pp. 155–175). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46.
MannheimK. (1960). Ideology and utopia: An introduction to sociology of knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
47.
McDonoughJ.ShawC. (1993). Materials and methods in ELT: A teacher’s guide. USA: Blackwell Publications.
48.
McGrathI. (2006). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
49.
Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). (1993). Learning without burden: Report of the National Advisory Commission. New Delhi: Government of India.
50.
Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). (2005). Regulatory mechanisms for textbooks and parallel textbooks taught in schools outside the government system: A report. New Delhi: Central Advisory Board of Education, Government of India.
51.
National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). (1986). Evaluation of text books from the standpoint of national integration guidelines. New Delhi: NCERT.
52.
National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). (1997). Fifth survey of educational research, 1988–1992, Trend reports (Volume I). New Delhi: NCERT.
53.
National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). (2000). Fifth survey of educational research, 1988–1992, Trend reports (Volume II). New Delhi: NCERT.
54.
National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). (2005a). National curriculum framework 2005. New Delhi: NCERT.
55.
National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). (2005b). Position paper on curriculum, syllabus and textbooks. (National Focus Group). New Delhi: NCERT.
56.
National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). (2006). Sixth survey of educational research, 1993–2000 (Volume I), New Delhi: NCERT.
57.
National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). (2007). Sixth survey of educational research, 1993–2000 (Volume II), New Delhi: NCERT.
58.
Nirantar. (2009a). Tamil Nadu, Textbook regimes: A feminist critique of nation and identity. New Delhi: Nirantar.
59.
Nirantar. (2009b). West Bengal, Textbook regimes: A feminist critique of nation and identity. New Delhi: Nirantar.
60.
PathakA. (2002). Social implications of schooling: Knowledge, pedagogy and consciousness. New Delhi: Rainbow.
61.
PROBE. (1999). Public report on basic education in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
62.
ReynoldR. E.TaylorM. A.SteffensenM. S.ShireyL. L.AndersonR. C. (1982). Cultural schemata and reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 17(3), 353–366.
63.
RudolphL. I.RudolphS. H. (1983). Rethinking secularism: Genesis and implications of the textbook controversy, 1977–79. Pacific Affairs, 56(1), 15–37.
64.
SarangapaniP. (Winter1992- Spring 1993). Learning to learn Mathematics: Stages through and exploratory experience. Future, 29(30), 22–25.
65.
ScraseT. (1993). Image, ideology and inequality: Cultural domination, hegemony and schooling in India. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
66.
SharmaI. S. (1993). Comprehensibility of language in primary level textbooks of Science, Social Science and Language. New Delhi: NCERT.
67.
SharmaR. S. (1977). Ancient India. New Delhi: NCERT.
68.
ThaparR. (1967). Medieval India. New Delhi: NCERT.
69.
TomlinsonB. (Ed.). (2003). Introduction: Are materials developing? In. Developing materials for Language teaching. New York: Continuum.
70.
YoungM. (1971). Knowledge and control. London: Collier-Macmillan.
