Table of Content Section1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9 Appendix1|2|3|4|5|6|7 Notes|Executive Summary|Download(PDF format, 798KB) SECTION SIX - GOVERNMENT POLICIES 6.1        This section ofthe Council's paper examines current government policy in relation to textbooksupply and demand, in terms of the textbook selection process, and the effect onpublishers being able to meet that demand. Educational policies 6.2        During thecourse of the Council's study, both individual publishers and the publishers'associations claimed escalating prices of textbooks were the result of thegovernment's implementation of 'Target Oriented Curriculum' (TOC) some yearsago, coupled with separating schools into English and Chinese streams. Each ofthe policies resulted in a smaller market for particular types of textbooks. 6.3        According to thepublishers, they had to produce assessment exercises, teacher's manuals,progress charts, and other supplementary teaching material for teachers andstudents in addition to producing TOC textbooks. This, it was claimed, hadincurred substantial costs through investment in resources and manpower.However, ED stated that in the Recommended Textbook List, no extra materialswere required to be produced other than TOC textbooks and work sheets. While noton the Recommended Textbook List, those supplementary materials might beindispensable to assist teachers in their adjustment process to the TOC scheme.The Council's study found that TOC textbooks were generally higher in price [20]than those of the traditional curriculum. 6.4        Publisherssubmitted that the ‘mother tongue teaching policy? compelled the productionof a new set of Chinese language textbooks and instructional materials. It wasclaimed that publication of texts in both English and Chinese not only increasedproduction costs, but also decreased the circulation volume of each version,consequently leading to higher unit prices. 6.5        In regard tocurriculum changes, publishers noted that in some cases a textbook may beproduced to serve what is ostensibly a trial change in curriculum; although itmay not have been characterised in these terms. In some circumstances, theinvestment by publishers in producing related textbooks, and competing with eachother for selection by schools, might not be recovered because the curriculumchange is later abandoned. Given these circumstances it was felt that ED couldconsider that where textbooks are being sought for what is ostensibly a trialeducational purpose, measures could be adopted to balance the risks associatedwith producing material against the costs. For example, that one publisher beselected to produce the initial material rather than having publishers competeagainst each other at that stage. The market could then be opened up when thecurriculum change has been established as long term policy. 6.6        It is outsidethe scope of this paper to examine whether the Government's implementation ofTOC and the separation of schools into English and Chinese streams are justifiedin terms of cost-benefit considerations. Nevertheless, it is clear that ED wouldneed to constantly keep in mind the requirement to formulate a coherent set ofprinciples on education policy, that takes into account the cost implicationsfor publishers, and the impact on parents' financial burdens. Curriculum development 6.7        According to thepublishers, one of the causes of increases in the cost of production is ED'speriodic revamp of the curriculum. Furthermore, it was stated that the lead-intime from announcement of a new curriculum to approving a final list oftextbooks by ED exerted great pressure on publishers. Hence, they had to work ona tight schedule which in turn increased production costs. 6.8        The Council wasinformed by ED that a curriculum is revised on a need basis upon advice of theCurriculum Development Council (CDC). There is no fixed period cycle. Similar tothe case of Singapore, revision of curriculum is according to actual needs;there is no specific period for curriculum review. 6.9        ED also statedthat CDC adopt a multi-stage consultation for curriculum development wherepublishers are kept informed of up-to-date development of the new/revisedcurriculum matters and policies with regard to the writing of textbooks. In anattempt to map out the lead-in time for textbook revisions in differentsubjects, the Council examined ongoing revisions in CDI syllabuses (based oninformation provided by ED) and tabulated the textbook production schedule in Appendix4. It can be observed from the data collected by the Council that thetime span available for publishers to produce drafts of textbooks for review isnormally 14 months [21]for most subjects. 6.10        However,problems still arise. For example, a newspaper article at the time revealed adelay in the publishing of computer textbooks for the school year 1999/2000. Thecomputer textbooks for secondary forms 4-5 were not available in August, whenthe new school year was only one month away. In response to questions on theadequacy of the lead-in time, ED argued that they had informed publishers of thesubject curriculum at all stages beginning in the year of 1998. From their pointof view the prospective publishers should have started their informationgathering process, which would allow them sufficient time to the implementationof the new syllabus for computer studies subject. ED commented further that thesystem operates to serve the best interest of students, but not the interests ofpublishers. Periodic revisions 6.11        It was statedthat ED adopts a Three-Year Rule for Revised Editions, which means that once atextbook is graded “A?, i.e. to be included in the Recommended TextbookList, it will not normally be reviewed again for a period of three years, savefor certain subjects that necessitate up-to-date materials. To avoid unnecessaryrevision of textbooks, ED’s practice is that Textbook Review Panels (createdfor different subject areas) will go through proposed revised editions oftextbooks to ensure that the revision is substantial enough to merit a revisededition. 6.12        At first glancethe Three-Year Rule appears a sound policy. However, it is equally valid toquery why a specific period is taken for conducting a review of a textbook, asopposed to monitoring the necessity for revision on a needs basis. This isparticularly so because the period of three years might not necessarily be theusual period of time over which educational material for a particular subjectwill become redundant. The stipulation of a specific review period more or lessinvites a revision of the text and therefore increases the likelihood of a newedition that will make previous texts redundant. This can impair the viabilityof a second hand retail market, and add to the costs for the industry. 6.13        Nevertheless,while agreeing that removing the Three Year Rule may attract unnecessarysubmission of review of revised textbooks, the Council considers a strict needsbased approach should be applied to the Rule. Approval should not be automatic.Revision should not be approved if there is not sufficient improvement orsignificant change. Production schedules 6.14        With advancesin printing technology that facilitate quick modifications to textbooks, thelead-in time schedule does not appear to be particularly tight for textbookproduction. According to ED, the review system has in general been working wellto ensure that textbook material is up-to-standard and reasonably up-to-date. Toimprove the efficiency in the operational flow, a quarterly submission schedule(the deadlines for submission are the end of February, May, August and November)has recently been adopted, whereby review reports are issued and approvedtextbooks are updated to the Recommended Textbook List on the ED website afterthree months from submission. 6.15        For publishersto have their textbooks included in the Recommended Textbook List, they mustsubmit drafts of their textbooks to one of the relevant Textbook Review Panelsfor review through the Textbook Committee Secretariat, following a quarterlysubmission schedule. It is essential that for textbooks to be graded “A?they be written in accordance with the requirements in the relevant subjectcurriculum guide/syllabus and the general and subject specific textbookguidelines. Taking into consideration the comments of the reviewers, theconvener of a Textbook Review Panel will then make a recommendation to therelevant co-coordinator for an overall grading of the textbook in the TextbookReview Report. Textbooks graded “A? will be included in the RecommendedTextbook List [22].Textbooks graded “B? will not be included on the Recommended Textbook List.Broadly speaking, textbooks may be graded “B? either because they are notwritten in line with the CDC subject curriculum guide/syllabus; or they containinadequate coverage of curriculum guide/syllabus; or the content, arrangement oftopics, concepts, appropriateness of language and other errors of the submittedcopies etc. are not considered up to the required standard by the TextbookReview Panels. According to ED's records, in most cases the resubmitted versionsmeet the stipulated requirements. 6.16        The followingflow chart describes the procedures of ED’s Textbook Review System(information provided by ED). Flow of Procedures of the Textbook ReviewSystem   School Guidelines from ED 6.17       ED has issued and regularly updates circulars in relation to the selection oftextbooks for use in schools [23]. 6.18       To assist schools in making appropriate selection of textbooks, ED requiresschools to set up subject textbook committees for conducting annual review oftextbooks. The main focus of the review aims at evaluating the relevance andsuitability of textbooks in meeting the educational needs and abilities ofstudents. In the course of selection of textbooks/ learning materials, allmembers of a subject textbook committee are required to avoid or declare anyconflicts of interest that may arise. 6.19       Furthermore, ED gives schools some guidance on the change of textbooks. Ifchange of textbooks is found necessary, the subject committees are encouraged towork out a set of pre-determined subject-based selection criteria and keep aproper record of their final decision and recommendation. This is to provide asafeguard against any allegations of unfairness or impropriety. Frequent changeof textbooks/ learning materials could impose an undue financial burden uponparents and schools are thus advised to make changes only if those currently inuse are found unsuitable. 6.20       In its Schools Curriculum Circular, ED advises schools to give preference totextbooks which are lower in price and lighter in weight. Nevertheless, theeventual selection is still at the schools' discretion. As noted in Table 5 (Section7), not all schools, as revealed in the Council's survey, formallyconsider the price and weight of textbooks as major evaluation criteria. 6.21       CDI has lately released new Guiding Principles [24]to provide criteria for schools/teachers to use in selecting quality textbooksfor their students. The Guiding Principles include criteria for assessingquality in four areas: content, learning and teaching, language, and technicaldesign. For instance, textbook content should only include core elements of thesubject curriculum and not excessive and unnecessary information, so as to avoidoverload in content and to leave room for students to 'learn how to learn'. Thisin turn would help reduce the weight of the textbooks and thereby the cost. Ontechnical design, font type and font size, and quality of paper are alsoaddressed in the Guiding Principles. For example, instead of white or glossyfinish, cream and matt finished paper should be used. 6.22       In addition to providing criteria for schools and teachers in selecting qualitytextbooks for their students, the Guiding Principles aim to serve as a referencefor textbook writers and to provide criteria for reviewers for the inclusion oftextbooks in the Recommended Textbook List. The last point is important as thismay imply that for any textbook writers who do not follow the criteria set outin the Guiding Principles, their textbooks will not be posted on the RecommendedTextbook List. 6.23       Since 1990, schools have been allowed greater autonomy such that they are nolonger required to submit textbook lists to ED for approval before a school yearbegins; except for new schools opened for the first year. School authorities,however, can approach ED for advice on textbooks. Reference to the RecommendedTextbook List is encouraged and a standing arrangement with a particularpublisher is to be avoided. 6.24       With regard to textbook lists, the Council considers that schools shouldindicate prominently that the prices quoted are for reference only, and thatparents are free to purchase the textbooks from any booksellers. Where schoolsare either directly or indirectly involved with booksellers in the sale oftextbooks, parents' rights to free choice should be upheld and they should beinformed that purchases from those booksellers is not compulsory. 6.25       ED requires schools, through the issue of circulars, to follow certainguidelines and assumes an advisory role as to other activities relating to thechoice of textbook. From information available to the Council, it appears thatED has not taken any direct monitoring or enforcement role on the guidelines,but has relied on the schools for implementation. Textbook policy in other jurisdictions 6.26       In section eight of this paper is a summary of textbook policy in a number ofother countries against which Hong Kong's practice and procedure can becompared. 6.27       In summary, as far as textbook selection is concerned, most countries adopt the‘review system? (where textbooks are reviewed against a set of establishededucation principles). Only a few countries, such as Mainland China, adopt‘centralised textbook publishing? or ‘state published? textbooks. Thetrend appears to be one of moving gradually towards free choice. Textbooks inthese countries are mostly published commercially and publishers submittextbooks for government approval. It is very common for there to be an officialrecommended list of approved titles for school reference.