textbook procurement baseline study - mca · pdf filetextbook procurement baseline study 4.2.6...

Report

Namibia

Textbook Procurement Baseline Study

May 2010


GOPA Consultants

Hindenburgring 18

61348 Bad Homburg

Germany

Phone +49 6172 930-351

Fax: +49 6172 930-440

Email: [email protected]

Report

Namibia


May 2010

Commissioned by the Millennium Challenge Account Namibia

With funding from the Millennium Challenge Corporation

i

CONTENTS

GOPA CONSULTANTS - SIAPAC Textbook Procurement Baseline Study

Contents

0 Executive Summary.....................................................................................................................1

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 3

2 10% Sample Survey .....................................................................................................................4

2.1 Methodology.............................................................................................................................................. 4

2.2 Fieldwork..................................................................................................................................................... 4

3 Analysis of the quantitative data ..........................................................................................8

3.1 Textbook Control Form Data.............................................................................................................. 8 3.1.1 Textbook Control Forms....................................................................................................................... 8 3.1.2 Data Entry of Textbook Control Forms ......................................................................................... 9 3.1.3 Comparison of sample Survey textbook counts to Textbook Control

Form .03 (inventory) ............................................................................................................................. 11 3.1.4 Comparison of sample Survey textbook counts to Textbook Control

Form .01 (order)........................................................................................................................................14 3.1.5 School level analysis .............................................................................................................................17 3.1.6 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................................. 19

3.2 Analyses of the data collected in the 10% Sample Survey ................................................20 3.2.1 Provision of textbooks: Ratios between learners and textbooks...................................20

4 Outcomes of the Key Informant Interviews and Focus Group

Discussions ..................................................................................................................................28

4.1 Background to the Textbook Ordering Process.......................................................................28

4.2 Management of the Textbook Procurement Process ..........................................................29 4.2.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................29 4.2.2 General remarks on the textbook ordering process .............................................................30 4.2.3 Textbook catalog.................................................................................................................................... 32 4.2.4 Awareness of the textbook ordering process at different levels ................................... 32 4.2.5 Change of book orders at regional education offices...........................................................34

ii

CONTENTS


4.2.6 Delivery of textbooks...........................................................................................................................34 4.2.7 Effectiveness of the ordering process..........................................................................................38 4.2.8 Budget for procuring textbooks at school level ..................................................................... 40

4.3 Utilization of Textbooks .....................................................................................................................43 4.3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................43 4.3.2 Sharing of textbooks ............................................................................................................................43 4.3.3 Taking textbooks home......................................................................................................................45 4.3.4 Only teachers having textbooks ................................................................................................... 46

4.4 Condition and Durability of Textbooks ......................................................................................47 4.4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................47 4.4.2 Condition of textbooks .......................................................................................................................47 4.4.3 Durability of textbooks.......................................................................................................................47 4.4.4 Handling of textbooks by learners................................................................................................48 4.4.5 Strategies at school level to keep textbooks in good condition..................................... 49

4.5 Content of Textbooks........................................................................................................................... 52 4.5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 52 4.5.2 Content of textbooks ........................................................................................................................... 52 4.5.3 Comprehension of textbook content........................................................................................... 53 4.5.4 Helpfulness of textbook content ................................................................................................... 53

4.6 Storage of Textbooks at Schools .....................................................................................................54 4.6.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................54

5 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................58

5.1 General .......................................................................................................................................................58 5.1.1 Implementation of the textbook policy .....................................................................................58 5.1.2 Textbook provision...............................................................................................................................59

5.2 Textbook catalog.................................................................................................................................... 61

5.3 Inventory...................................................................................................................................................63

5.4 Ordering of textbooks......................................................................................................................... 64

5.5 Forms and data entry system......................................................................................................... 66

5.6 Utilizing the Textbook Control Form .03 data as baseline data for

an LSM database ................................................................................................................................... 68

5.7 Conducting a full Survey of schools ............................................................................................ 68

5.8 Future data collection and Surveys ............................................................................................. 69

iii

ANNEXES


Annexes

Annex A Quantitative Data Collection Instruments

Annex B Key Informant Interview Instrument

Annex C Focus Group Discussion Instrument

Annex D List of Key Informant Interviews

Annex E List of Focus Group Discussions

Annex F Data

Annex G Proposed Textbook Control Form .03

iv

TABLES


Tables

Table 1: Reasons why interviews could not be conducted............................................................... 6 Table 2: Distribution of differences in counts (all linked records) ............................................... 11 Table 3: Distribution of differences in counts (several unlikely or incomplete

records removed) ................................................................................................................................13 Table 4: Distribution of differences in counts between total stock and stock

counted during the Survey ............................................................................................................15 Table 5: Distribution of differences in counts between the reported stock on

hand and the corresponding stock counted during the Survey ................................. 16 Table 6: Enrolments, textbook stock and Learner:Book ratios – All books...............................21 Table 7: Enrolments, textbook stock and Learner:Book ratios – Approved books

only...........................................................................................................................................................24 Table 8: How well officers are informed about the text book ordering process .................. 33 Table 9: Regional offices change school textbook orders ................................................................34 Table 10: What works well and what does not work well in the procurement of

textbooks ............................................................................................................................................... 35 Table 11: Results of ineffectiveness and inefficiency in the textbook procurement

process: Frequency of delays ....................................................................................................... 37 Table 12: The Effect of the present ordering process on theprovision of textbooks

to schools: Adequacy of provision.............................................................................................38 Table 13: Effect of present process of ordering on the provision of textbooks to

schools.....................................................................................................................................................39 Table 14: Effectiveness and efficiency of textbook verification process ....................................39 Table 15: Sharing of textbooks ........................................................................................................................44 Table 16: Extent to which learners were permitted to take textbooks home......................... 46 Table 17: Durability of textbooks...................................................................................................................47 Table 18: Does the content of textbooks cover the syllabi? .............................................................. 52 Table 19: Helpfulness of textbooks: responses of the FGDs.............................................................. 53 Table 20: Types of storage facilities at schools ........................................................................................ 55 Table 21: Adequacy of storage facilities at schools ............................................................................... 55 Table 22: Size of storerooms .............................................................................................................................56 Table 23: Number of schools in different ranges of total book storage shelf meters........... 57

v

ABBREVIATIONS


Abbreviations

DoS Description of Services: Appendix A of Contract No: MCAN/CIF/RFPIP2.1 for Consultant

services for the provision of a Textbook Baseline Study Contract No: MCAN/CIF/RFPIP2.1

for Consultant services for the provision of a Textbook Baseline Study

EMIS Education Management Information System

ETSIP Education and Training Sector Improvement Program

FGD Focus Group Discussion

GOPA Gesellschaft für Organisation, Planung und Ausbildung

KI Key Informant

KII Key Informant Interview

LSM Learning support material

MCA-N Millennium Challenge Account Namibia

MCC Millennium Challenge Corporation

MoE Ministry of Education

NIED National Institute for Educational Development

REO Regional education office

SCMU Supply Chain Management Unit

SIAPAC Social Impact Assessment and Policy Analysis Corporation

VAT Value Added Tax

DoS Description of Services: Appendix A of Contract No: MCAN/CIF/RFPIP2.1 for Consultant

services for the provision of a Textbook Baseline Study

EMIS Education Management Information System

ETSIP Education and Training Sector Improvement Program

1

CHAPTER 0

Executive Summary


0 Executive Summary

Overview

The Textbook Baseline Study was conducted to “collect detailed information on textbooks and related indicators in

the Namibian general education system … to ascertain the exact level of textbooks presence for each Namibian

school for English, Math and Science1.” The Study comprised (1) the capturing on computer of textbook inventory

forms and textbook orders collected by the Ministry of Education, (2) a quantitative sample survey in 150 schools to

assess the accuracy of data reported in the mentioned inventory and order forms, and (3) a qualitative study to

assess school-level issues related to textbook utilization.

Services rendered

The Ministry of Education had collected textbook inventory data, sending inventory forms to all schools with the

request to complete these forms and return them to the Ministry head office. It also sent order forms to the schools

for them to order any required textbooks. These forms were returned to the Ministry over an extended period, with

forms still being received in considerable numbers while the data were entered.

The consultant entered the inventory and order forms for the subjects English, Math and Science on computer. At the

request of the Ministry and the Millennium Challenge Account Namibia a data entry system of the Ministry was

used to ensure the sustainability of the exercise. At the time, the consultant had also developed his own system. The

data entry system used had several shortcomings, which negatively influenced the reliability and value of the

captured data, and necessitated extensive efforts to clean the data.

Trained data collection teams visited the 150 schools of the sample survey, counting all textbooks and other learning

support materials in the subjects English, Math and Science. Key Informants were interviewed in all schools and

circuit and regional offices to collect the qualitative data. Key Informant Interviews were also conducted with key

Ministry staff and representatives of the textbook publishers and distributors. Focus Group Discussions were held

with groups of learners at selected schools.

In the data analysis, the book count data collected during the 10% sample survey were compared to the data submit-

ted by the schools on the inventory and order forms and the ratios between learners and textbooks were calculated.

The Key Informant Interviews and Focus Group Discussions were analyzed.

Findings

The textbook numbers counted in the sample survey agreed reasonably well with the numbers reported by the

schools on the Ministry inventory and order forms. Comparing the inventories, it was determined that 45% of the

counts agreed with one another within plus or minus two books. Seventy-four per cent of the counts agreed within

plus or minus 12 books. There was no sign of a tendency to consistently report only part of the book stock or too

many books. Still, the differences found between the counts suggest that the Ministry should verify all book counts

when it establishes a textbook stock register.

1 Description of Services

2

CHAPTER 0

Executive Summary


The numbers of learners sharing a textbook was found to exceed 1 for all of the three subjects in the Primary and

Junior Secondary school phase. That is, in general textbooks were shared between learners. The situation was better

in the Senior Secondary phase (Grades 11 and 12), although some sharing of textbooks was also necessary.

The less than satisfactory book provision was confirmed in the Key Informant Interviews. The inadequate budget

allocation for textbooks was cited as a major factor in this respect.

The outcomes of the qualitative survey indicated that the procedures for ordering textbooks were good in general,

but that there were shortcomings in the implementation. The annual process of ordering textbooks depended on all

parties strictly adhering the program to allow books to be delivered to schools in good time. Problems were, though,

experienced in this respect.

Other issues requiring improvement were mentioned: For example, the book catalog should contain a smaller

selection of book titles to choose from, and titles which should no longer be ordered should be removed from the

catalog.

The communication concerning book orders between the regional and circuit offices and the schools should be

improved, in particular in conveying the schools’ textbook budget allocation to the schools, and informing schools

about any cuts which were made to their book orders.

It became apparent that there was a training need in respect of the ordering procedures at the school and, to some

extent, circuit level. The training should, among others, include ordering procedures and methods for optimally

utilizing the textbook budget. The verification and certification of book deliveries needs to be addressed. In this

respect, schools need to be made aware of the necessity to also receive book orders after school hours, to contribute

towards keeping the delivery costs low.

Recommendations

Recommendations for a textbook budget allocation allowing to sustain a 1:1 ratio between learners and textbooks

related to the management of costs, e.g., extending the life of books by looking after them, and prudent textbook

ordering strategies. Budget priorities were also recommended to be reviewed within the Ministry and on national

level.

A recommendation was made for investigating the feasibility of a textbook fund, which would allow ordering

textbooks earlier in the year than was possible within the state’s budget cycle. The fund would be created with

external assistance and be replenished annually from the Ministry’s textbook budget.

Several recommendations were made for improving the textbook catalog, among others to reduce the number of

book titles schools could choose from.

It was recommended to produce a database system for the compilation of the textbook catalog. Such a system would

make it possible to resolve present shortcomings of the catalog, which originate from the catalog being compiled in a

spreadsheet.

The development of a textbook inventory database was recommended. Ways of ensuring a high level of accuracy of

data entry were elaborated on, and a data collection form including data elements required for the validation was

designed.

It was recommended that the textbook stock of all schools should be verified by the Ministry after the inventory

database was installed and tested.

3

CHAPTER 1

Introduction


1 Introduction

The Study was part of a set of six activities designed to contribute towards the establishment of a transparent

textbook acquisition, management and utilization system, and increase the ratio of books to learners. The ultimate

objective of the Textbook Baseline Study is to “improve learners’ access to textbooks and the efficiency of the man-

agement of textbooks within primary and secondary school”2.

The immediate objective of the study was to “collect

detailed information on textbooks and related indicators in the Namibian general education system … to ascertain

the exact level of textbooks presence for each Namibian school for English, Math and Science”2. The expected out-

come of the Survey was to “assist to ascertain the accuracy of textbook counting, recording and reporting process.”

The Consultant designed and conducted a baseline Survey of the present provision of English, Science and Mathe-

matics textbooks for grades 1-12 in primary and secondary schools in Namibia in a sample of 150 schools. The Survey

served to “assess the accuracy of data reported in the 2009 Textbook Policy forms "Textbook Control form .01" and

"Textbook Control form .03"”3, i.e., the textbook orders and the textbook inventory.

The Textbook Survey included quantitative and qualitative data collection at 150 schools. The quantitative data

consisted of textbook counts in the subjects English, Mathematics and Science, and learner counts in each grade,

disaggregated by gender and age. Qualitative data were collected during Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and Focus

Group Discussions (FGDs) at the national, regional, circuit, and school levels.

This report describes the quantitative and qualitative data collection activities at the different levels and presents

the findings. Data collected by the Ministry of Education (MoE) using Textbook Control Forms .01 and .03 were

entered in the database for the subjects English, Science and Math.

The findings of the KIIs and FGDs together with the outcomes of the data analysis were used to make recommenda-

tions for improving the textbook provision system. Lessons learned from the data entry exercise, which was quite

challenging, allowed making recommendations for improving the data collection and processing in ordering text-

books and setting up and maintaining a textbook inventory.

2

Contract No: MCAN/CIF/RFPIP, Appendix A - Description of Services (DoS), 1. Objective

3

DoS, 2.1

4

CHAPTER 2

10% Sample Survey


2 10% Sample Survey

The methodology was described in detail in the Survey Design Report, which was submitted to and approved by the

Millennium Challenge Account Namibia (MCA-N.) An overview is presented below.

Sampling

The sampling frame consisted of all Namibian government schools and private schools receiving textbooks from the

government. 150 schools were randomly selected from the total of 1610 schools. The sampling method ensured that

proportional numbers of schools were selected from each region, and that primary, combined and secondary schools,

as well as schools of all sizes were included.

It was agreed with the MCA-N that the sample would not be stratified, as several of the strata would have been very

small. The sample contained, for example, only three schools in the Omaheke region, while both the Erongo and

Karas regions had only four schools in the sample.

Survey instruments

The Survey instruments, two quantitative Survey forms – textbook and learner count forms – and the KII and FGD

guides, were developed by the Team Leader and the Deputy Team Leader. The draft tools were shared with the MCA-

N, Millennium Challenge Cooperation (MCC) and MoE for comments. These comments were taken into considera-

tion during the finalization of the tools. The Survey instruments are contained in Annexes A through C.

The quantitative data collection instruments were designed to collect data per class group, allowing the data collec-

tors to move from one class to the next to conduct the Survey. Textbooks issued to teachers and stored books were

also recorded.

Training of enumerators and pilot Survey

Forty-two persons attended the training for the Survey from 7 - 17 October 2009.

The training was conducted in a participatory manner. It included topics such as an overview of the study, introduc-

tion to the instruments, familiarization with the instruments and role-plays. Training also included interviewing

and facilitation skills, importance of professional dress codes, field conduct of personnel, and communication during

fieldwork.

2.1 Methodology

2.2 Fieldwork

5

CHAPTER 2

10% Sample Survey


Towards the end of the training period, a pilot Survey was conducted in four schools under the supervision of the

Team Leader, deputy Team Leader and the field managers. Two primary schools, one combined and one secondary

school were included in the Survey. These schools included urban and rural schools in Windhoek and within an

hour’s drive from Windhoek.

The outcome of the pilot Survey was positive, showing that the instruments were suitable for use in the Survey. The

KII instrument was rather long, but the school managers interviewed seemed to appreciate that somebody was

taking note of their views in respect of the textbook issues, which were addressed. The instrument was, thus, not

shortened.

The pilot Survey also served as a practical exercise for the field workers. The pilot Survey provided feedback on the

validity of the questions and showed whether the supervisors understood the questions. Where required, adjust-

ments were made to the instruments.

The enumerators were tested towards the end of the training period. Test results together with observations from

the pilot Survey guided the selection of trainees who were recruited as supervisors and data collectors respectively.

In total, 35 trainees were hired as enumerator (16), supervisor (16) and field manager (3). The Deputy Team Leader and

a Senior Research Associate from SIAPAC also participated in the Survey as field managers.

Data collection

The survey was conducted in the 150 schools in the sample. It became necessary in two cases to replace a school by

another one. When the first replacement had to be made, it was agreed with the MCA and MCC to replace the school

with the next school on an ordered list of all schools in the sampling frame, which was used for selecting the sample.

The same replacement method was to be applied for any other replacement. One of the replaced schools was a

private school not receiving textbooks from government, thus not belonging in the sampling frame4. The other

school had closed down.

The quantitative data were collected by the supervisors and enumerators.

The supervisors were tasked with facilitating FGDs and administering KIIs. Supervisors had been trained in using

the discussion and interview guides. Special attention was given to ensuring that supervisors were familiar with

the issues and that they understood the importance of obtaining in-depth information. They were also trained in

probing for different opinions and in note-taking.

Several interviews could not be conducted despite substantial efforts by the data collection teams to get hold of the

interviewees. The reasons are discussed in detail below. The trends observed in the interviews which were con-

ducted were so clear that it could safely be assumed that the outcomes of the Survey were not significantly affected.

A lesson to be learned is, that a Survey conducted in schools towards the end of the school year and during the time

in which examinations are being taken5

is bound to be affected by a considerable number of absent or unavailable

respondents.

4 The school was classified incorrectly in the list of schools provided to the consultants.

5 The field work was done from 19 October to 13 November 2009.

6

CHAPTER 2

10% Sample Survey


KIIs were conducted with 12 out of 13 regional education directors or the person responsible for textbook procure-

ment in that particular region6. One of the interviews could not be conducted because the regional education

director remained unavailable even after several appointments were made and followed up. Thirty-seven (37) out of

56 circuit inspectors were interviewed. Some of the circuit inspectors were not responsible for the sampled schools,

others were committed elsewhere. The time of the Survey coincided with the time during which many circuit

inspectors were conducting their annual inspections at schools. In the schools, the principal or teacher responsible

for completing the Textbook Control Forms was interviewed. Only 134 out of 150 school interviews were conducted.

Eight additional KIIs were conducted at the national level with representatives from the Education Management

Information System (EMIS), the Supply Chain Management Unit (SCMU), the National Institute for Educational

Development (NIED), the Education and Training Sector Improvement Program (ETSIP), Suppliers and MCA-N. To

summarize, some interviews at regional, circuit and school levels could not be conducted because of the unavailabil-

ity of intended interviewees for the reasons listed in Table 1.

Table 1: Reasons why interviews could not be conducted

Regional Level Circuit Level School Level

Unavailability of one of the regional

interviewee after appointments

were made, two trips to the region

were made as well as telephonic

follow-ups

One official attending workshops

at NIED

One firmly refused to be

interviewed, then agreed but did

not show up for the interview

Not honoring appointments

Ignoring calls for appointments

On compassionate leave

Engaged in annual school

inspection

On compassionate leave

Marking examination papers in

Windhoek

On sick leave

On maternity leave

Principals unavailable and

teachers uncomfortable about

being interviewed

The numbers of interviews conducted at all levels were sufficient to exhaust all issues under discussion. National,

regional and school level KIIs allowed the baseline assessment to obtain information on the following aspects:

Procurement of textbooks;

Storage of textbooks in schools;

Available storage space;

Security of (stored) textbooks;

Durability of textbooks;

Other relevant aspects addressed to a lesser degree:

Textbook Catalogue (discussed in more detail in several interviews on the national level);

Management of the textbooks in schools;

Contents of textbooks.

6 See also details in Section 4.

7

CHAPTER 2

10% Sample Survey


FGDs were held to consider issues with regard to utilization of textbooks at the school level, as well as factors con-

straining provision and utilization. As none of the quantitative forms collected data on provision and utilization

from the pupil’s perspective, these FGDs provided important insights required to improve the system. Thirteen FGDs

with primary school learners and thirteen with secondary school learners were conducted, i.e., a total of 26 FGDs

across the 13 regions. FGDs covered the following main issues:

Access to textbooks.

Utilization of textbooks.

Handling of textbooks by learners.

Educational value of textbooks.

Durability and care of textbooks.

Quality control in the FGDs was ensured through the structure of the teams. Only supervisors were allowed to

conduct them, with enumerators supporting with note-taking during the discussions. Supervisors had the responsi-

bility of re-writing the notes with the support of the enumerators. Only supervisors were allowed to conduct KIIs

with circuit inspectors and school principals. Regional level interviews were in most cases conducted by field man-

agers and in some cases by supervisors. Field managers ensured that they sat in on some of the interviews

conducted by supervisors. Field managers also went through the re-written notes of supervisors to ensure that

details were captured in the re-writes. Discussions between field managers and supervisors included the impor-

tance of probing and collecting in-depth information from FGD participants and key Informants (KIs).

KIIs on the national level were conducted by the Team Leader and the Deputy Team Leader. The interviews differed

from the school, circuit and regional level interviews in the sense that most respondents were not involved in the

routine procurement procedures, but had specific important responsibilities towards and insights into the provision

of textbooks. The national level responses were, thus, not included in the numeric analyses, but are reported on in

the text.

Limitations

In spite of minor setbacks during the interviews, there were no serious effects on the overall outcomes. The unavail-

ability of respondents was already mentioned above. During some interviews, several questions were not answered

because the interviewee considered him-/herself not able or in a position to respond, or as a result of the limited

time they could afford for the interview.

8

CHAPTER 3

Analysis of the quantitative data


3 Analysis of the quantitative data

Two data sets were utilized in the quantitative analysis: The data collected in the 10% Sample Survey and the data

from the Textbook Control Forms .01 (orders) and .03 (inventory). The Textbook Control Forms were collected by the

Ministry of Education. Entering the forms for English, Maths and Science in the database was part of the Description

of Services (DoS) of the Study. As the constraints experienced during the data entry had a significant impact on the

analysis, and as they were the major cause for the delays in the study, these constraints are reported below.

3.1.1 Textbook Control Forms

The MoE had developed two “Textbook Control Forms” to be completed by schools:

Textbook Control Form .01 was used for ordering textbooks. One form had to be completed per combination of

school, grade and subject. Apart from the book title, ISBN and ordering information, the form provided columns for

reporting for each ordered book, the stock on hand and the stock to be written off. The enrolment in the grade also

had to be stated.

Textbook Control Form .03 was used for reporting the inventory of textbooks in each school, again completing a form

for each combination of school, grade and subject.

The Textbook Control Forms .01 and .03 were sent to schools by the MoE earlier in 2009, with the request for them to

complete these forms. The return rate was low, which prompted the MoE to send forms for a second time. Although

it was requested that schools should not submit a second set of forms if they had already responded, a considerable

number of schools completed and submitted a second set of forms. Many forms were submitted late or incomplete.

By the time the data analysis started, 125 sample schools had submitted Textbook Control Forms .03 (inventory), but

four of these had not submitted any forms in the Survey subjects, English, Mathematics and the natural sciences. It

was determined in the end that only 117 schools had reported books which were also found in the sample survey.

Textbook Control Forms .01 (order) had been submitted by 89 sample schools, of which one did not submit any form

in the Survey subjects.

When the Survey was conducted, Textbook Control Forms were still being received from schools. Excluding schools,

which had not submitted their forms by the start of the Survey from the sampling frame, was considered, but

rejected as it would have introduced a bias into the Survey.

Only Textbook Control Forms received by 12 December 2009 were included in the analysis. Some forms reportedly

still arrived in the early months of 2010.

During the 10% Sample Survey, it took the data collectors one or two days per school to count the textbook inventory

and to conduct the KII. It is clear that it should not have taken schools months to submit their Textbook Control

Forms, even though they also had to compile book orders from the textbook catalog. To learn from this experience, it

3.1 Textbook Control Form Data

9

CHAPTER 3



must be mentioned that the slow and incomplete return of forms can to some extent be ascribed to the Textbook

Control Forms having been sent directly to schools, sidestepping the regional hierarchy. This came out in informal

remarks picked up during the Survey, and it is also an observation made by the Consultant in several similar situa-

tions elsewhere.

3.1.2 Data Entry of Textbook Control Forms

The Textbook Control Forms were to be completed by all government schools and schools receiving textbooks from

government for all grades and subjects. The MoE, thus, extended its data collection beyond the subjects and grades

included in the Survey. The data enterers hired by the Consultants and data enterers hired by the MoE shared a

training facility of the MoE for the data entry. As already mentioned above, Textbook Control Forms were still being

received from schools for weeks after data entry had commenced.

The Consultants departed on the Survey under the premise that all Textbook Control Forms for the subjects English,

Math and Science would be available from the outset. They were not aware of having to share a data entry facility

and packs of questionnaires with MoE staff. The conditions of data entry, in particular the sharing of a facility with

another group working on the same sets of documents, the constant delivery of additional forms, and the difficulties

experienced with the data entry system, were quite challenging and contributed to the delays experienced in com-

pleting the Survey. It was not possible under these conditions to keep proper records of the deficiencies observed in

all the completed Textbook Control Forms.

The data entry system for capturing the Textbook Control Forms was developed by the MoE. The Consultants had

developed their own system, but the MCA-N and MoE preferred using the MoE system, mainly for sustainability

reasons, i.e., to ensure the continued utilization of the system by the MoE after the completion of the Survey.

Several features and shortcomings of the data entry system, which emerged during the data entry and analysis,

have to be reported here, as they had a significant impact on the data:

The system provided inadequate data verification at the time of data entry:

It was possible to enter non-existent school codes, i.e., it was possible to enter data using a school code with

no school associated with that code. Those data could only be deleted, not corrected. Attempts were made

later to identify missing data and to again capture those forms for which there were no data in the system.

It was possible to enter the same data more than once. Duplicate data were identified later and redundant

records were deleted.

There was no check on the correctness of the data. If provision had been made on the textbook control

forms and in the system to enter horizontal and vertical totals, then these totals could have been utilized for

verifying the consistency of the data. Incorrect data entry was observed in a number of cases when the en-

tered data were compared to the original forms while deleting duplicate entries.

Books were entered by selecting the appropriate book from a long list of 6 245 books. This list was compiled by

the MoE from the NIED book catalogues for the years 2005 to 2009. Although the data entry system automati-

cally moved to possible entries as the ISBN or book title was entered, the selection of a book entry was still very

tedious, time-consuming and error-prone. The following problems were experienced:

Certain books could not be located at all, i.e., neither the title nor the ISBN could be located. This was to some

extent due to having to enter the ISBN or title starting with the first number or character. The method often

failed as a result of the switch from 10 to 13 digit ISBN, or because schools had not entered the title on the

10

CHAPTER 3



form in exactly the same way as it was stored in the system. A better facility for looking up books was pro-

vided at a later stage, which resolved some of the shortcomings.

When a book could not be located in the list of books, it could not be entered at all, resulting in a consider-

able number of reported books not having been entered. Assuming that the list was compiled correctly by

the MoE, this will not have affected the orders, as books only included in older catalogs were not to be or-

dered.

There were cases where books could ‘legitimately’ not be found on the system, as they had not been in-

cluded in the NIED textbook catalogues since 2005.

The list of schools included many multiple entries. These duplicates originated from the list having been

compiled from different years’ textbook catalogues. In some cases, books also appeared in a textbook cata-

logue under different headings.

The duplicate entries resulted in a serious problem during the data analysis: The book to which each data

record referred, was identified by the serial number of the book in the list of books. In cases where there

were several entries of the same title or ISBN, each of these had a different serial number, i.e. they appeared

to the computer system, and thus also in the analysis, as different books. This had a significant effect on

comparing different data sets, as the data sets could no longer be linked reliably.

A “conversion table” was later compiled by the Consultants with the assistance of NIED to resolve this prob-

lem. In a number of cases it was, though, not possible to determine whether or not certain records referred

to the same book. In some of these cases the ISBN had not been stated, in others the same ISBN was appar-

ently used for a learner textbook and the corresponding teacher’s guide. The “conversion table”, thus, did

not fully resolve the problems caused by duplicate entries in the list of books. It would have required a ma-

jor exercise involving NIED and the publishers to reliably eliminate all duplicate entries in the database

table of textbooks. The uncertainties caused by titles which were entered incompletely on the Textbook

Control Forms (the space provided was rather small) would even then have left doubts.

After data entry of the Textbook Control Forms was completed, lists of potential errors or omissions were compiled

(see section 3.1.2 of Annex F.) and verified, comparing the original forms submitted by schools to the data entered in

the database. Any discrepancies between the original forms and the captured data were corrected in the dataset. In

this way it was also ensured that all submitted forms had been captured, and that they were not duplicated. Dupli-

cate book entries were again attended to during the data analysis, taking into account the above-mentioned

“conversion list.” Data corrections were made again, comparing the entered data to the original forms.

The measures described above will not have resolved all possible data issues, despite the significant efforts which

went into the data cleaning. Undetected incorrect data could, for example, have been caused by a data enterer

erroneously making an incorrect choice of book title due to a missing or incorrectly recorded ISBN on the form, or

because a book title was abbreviated on the form. As indicated above, the Textbook Control Forms and the data entry

system did not make provision for data verification at the time of data entry except for visual inspection of the data,

which was done. Visual inspection is, though, not a very reliable method.

11

CHAPTER 3



3.1.3 Comparison of sample Survey textbook counts to Textbook Control Form .03 (inventory)

The following comparison is based on the total numbers of reported books, i.e., the sum of good, fair, poor and write-

off books.

The difference in books reported below is the number of books reported on Textbook Control Form .03 minus the

number counted in the 10% sample Survey. A positive difference indicates that the school reported more books than

counted in the Survey, while a negative difference indicates that more books were counted in the Survey. Stated

differently, positive differences indicate over-reporting by schools, negative differences indicate under-reporting by

schools.

Analysis of all records which could be linked

The frequency of differences in counts, calculated as described above, was distributed as stated in Table 2 and graphi-

cally represented in the chart below the table.

Table 2: Distribution of differences in counts (all linked records)

Range Range

In terms of mid-point Frequency

-33 and less -33 and less 164

-32 to -28 -30 ± 2 34

-27 to -23 -25 ± 2 40

-22 to -18 -20 ± 2 73

-17 to -13 -15 ± 2 90

-12 to -8 -10 ± 2 175

-7 to -3 -5 ± 2 302

-2 to 2 0 ± 2 1553

3 to '7 5 ± 2 336

8 to 12 10 ± 2 173

13 to 17 15 ± 2 109

18 to 22 20 ± 2 69

23 to 27 25 ± 2 53

28 to 32 30 ± 2 34

33 and more 33 and more 209

12

CHAPTER 3



The differences between the counts were clearly centred around zero: 45% of all entries had a difference in the range

-2 to 2 books, while 74% of the differences ranged between -12 and 12 books. The average difference was 0.96, i.e., an

over-reporting by schools of one book. The standard deviation was 35.8. As shown below, the picture changes slightly

when an adjustment is made to the data by excluding entries, which appear to be incorrect from the analysis.

While the differences in the counts were not very large in general, there were a number of considerable differences

between the counts, well exceeding 30 books in a number of cases.

Frequency of differences between Textbook Control Form 03 and Sampling Survey

0200400600800

10001200140016001800

-33

an

d le

ss

-32

to -

28

-27

to -

23

-22

to -

18

-17

to -

13

-12

to -

8

-7 to

-3

-2 to

2

3 to

'7

8 to

12

13

to 1

7

18

to 2

2

23

to 2

7

28

to 3

2

33

an

d m

ore

Difference

Nu

mb

er o

f ca

ses

Differences in countscompared to normal distribution

(All entries which could be linked)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

-139

.5-1

19.5

-99.

5-7

9.5

-59.

5-3

9.5

-19.

50.

520

.540

.560

.580

.510

0.5

120.

514

0.5

Normal distribution

Histogram

13

CHAPTER 3



The distribution of the differences is not a normal distribution, as indicated in the graph above. This was to be

expected, as all data were expected to be accurate. The large differences which were also observed, even though in a

small number of cases, contributed to a relatively large standard deviation. The normal distribution shown in the

above diagram has been calculated using this standard deviation.

There may be different causes for the differences between the data sets, such as incorrect reporting, links between

the data sets which failed owing to the reasons described above, and data entry errors. The last two of these reasons

may have caused outliers which are substantially greater than expected in a normal distribution.

The Survey data were collected and entered in the database by class, e.g. Grade 8A and 8B separately. This may have

resulted in the same book title being entered against different serial numbers for the two classes, without the data

enterer noticing it. Differences in the numbers of books roughly equalling a typical class size were observed in

several cases. There were also cases where one data set had a number representing one or several classes, while the

other data set had a single-digit number, typical for teacher materials. Such differences may again have been caused

by the ambiguities in selecting a book title during data entry.

An adjustement of the data was made to determine whether excluding such ‘suspect’ cases would make a signifi-

cant difference to the outcome:

The following data were omitted:

All entries where the apparent Survey count was less than 60% of the count according to Textbook Control

Form .03. This would exclude cases where the data for a significant portion of classes was not linked to the other

classes;

All entries where the Textbook Control Form .03 count was less than 6, while the Survey count was greater than

15. This would eliminate records showing only teacher materials in the Textbook Control Form, while the corre-

sponding Survey data included textbooks for learners. The inverse of this is covered by the exclusion described

under the previous bullet.

The following distribution was obtained after removing such “unlikely” entries. The chart below Table 3 shows the

distribution graphically.

Table 3: Distribution of differences in counts (several unlikely or incomplete records removed)

Range Range



-32 to -28 -30 ± 2 29

-27 to -23 -25 ± 2 33

-22 to -18 -20 ± 2 60

-17 to -13 -15 ± 2 75

-12 to -8 -10 ± 2 169

-7 to -3 -5 ± 2 298

-2 to 2 0 ± 2 1477

3 to '7 5 ± 2 258

14

CHAPTER 3



Range Range


8 to 12 10 ± 2 94

13 to 17 15 ± 2 46

18 to 22 20 ± 2 21

23 to 27 25 ± 2 12

28 to 32 30 ± 2 6


Removing mentioned records to a large extent eliminated the positive outliers, i.e. records showing a significant

over-reporting of books by schools. This was to be expected, as it is not expected that schools would report more

books than they have in stock, especially when they are ordering books at the same time. Under-reporting might

have several causes, for example, omitting stock in store rooms. The changes observed in the distribution after

excluding “unlikely data” shows that data errors may be the cause of a significant number of the apparent outliers.

In this distribution, 54% of the cases range between -2 and 2 books, up from 45%, when no records are removed. 84%

of the cases range between -12 and 12 books, compared to the 74% when all books are included. The average is -4.8,

caused by eliminating assumedly wrongly indicated over-reporting. The standard deviation is 27.0.

The practical implications of these statistics are discussed in subsection 3.1.6, Conclusions.

3.1.4 Comparison of sample Survey textbook counts to Textbook Control Form .01 (order)

The sample Survey could only be linked to counts in Textbook Control Form .01 for books for which orders had been

placed. There were, thus, substantially fewer cases to compare than for Textbook Control Form .03.

Owing to the ambiguity in classifying the condition of books, only the total book counts were compared.

Frequency of differences betweenTextbook Control Forms and Sampling Survey

(several unlikely or incomplete records removed)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

-33

and

less

-32

to -

28

-27

to -

23

-22

to -

18

-17

to -

13

-12

to -

8

-7 t

o -3

-2 t

o 2

3 to

'7

8 to

12

13 t

o 17

18 t

o 22

23 t

o 27

28 t

o 32

33 a

nd m

ore

Range

Fre

qu

ency

15

CHAPTER 3



Similar problems in linking records as described for Textbook Control Form .03 were experienced. In addition, there

were cases where a revised version of a book was ordered, while the stock on hand actually referred to an earlier

edition of the book. The serial number of the revised book on the order form, thus, did not correspond with the serial

number in the Survey book count.

Out of the 1 136 cases where the Survey inventory could be linked to a book order, 156 had no book stock reported on

the order form. These cases were omitted in the analysis, which is thus based on 980 cases.

Table 4: Distribution of differences in counts between total stock and stock counted during the Survey

Range Range



-32 to -28 -30 ± 2 10

-27 to -23 -25 ± 2 14

-22 to -18 -20 ± 2 27

-17 to -13 -15 ± 2 25

-12 to -8 -10 ± 2 79

-7 to -3 -5 ± 2 99

-2 to 2 0 ± 2 437

3 to '7 5 ± 2 99

8 to 12 10 ± 2 53

13 to 17 15 ± 2 24

18 to 22 20 ± 2 14

23 to 27 25 ± 2 9

28 to 32 30 ± 2 12


The general pattern of differences between the numbers of books was similar to the pattern found for the inventory.

Similar to the analysis of the comparison of the textbook inventory without excluding doubtful data, 44.6% of all

cases ranged between a difference of -2 and 2 books. There were 767 cases in the range -12 to +12 books, i.e., 78.3% of

the cases. The average difference was -1.1, i.e., a slight over-reporting of books. This apparent over-reporting was

apparently caused by the relatively high number of negative outliers. The standard deviation was 22.5. Table 4 has

been shown graphically above. The practical implications of these statistics have again been included under 3.1.6.

16

CHAPTER 3



The reported stock on hand is compared to the Survey counts. The Survey teams may not have been able to see all

books during the one or two days they visited a school. Pupils may have left their books at home. Homes were too far

away from the school for pupils to be sent home to fetch the books. In such cases, the condition of the books could

not be determined. These books were recorded during the Survey as “books not seen.” In the analysis, these 602 out

of a total of 22 532 books were included in the category “good or fair”.

Table 5: Distribution of differences in counts between the reported stock on hand and the corresponding stock

counted during the Survey

Range Range



-32 to -28 -30 ± 2 10

-27 to -23 -25 ± 2 8

-22 to -18 -20 ± 2 18

-17 to -13 -15 ± 2 23

-12 to -8 -10 ± 2 64

-7 to -3 -5 ± 2 85

-2 to 2 0 ± 2 438

3 to '7 5 ± 2 97

8 to 12 10 ± 2 75

13 to 17 15 ± 2 37

18 to 22 20 ± 2 29

23 to 27 25 ± 2 10

28 to 32 30 ± 2 12


Frequency of differences between stock reported onthe Order Form and in the Sampling Survey

0

50

100

150

200

250300

350

400

450

500

-33

an

d le

ss

-32

to -

28

-27

to -

23

-22

to -

18

-17

to -

13

-12

to -

8

-7 to

-3

-2 to

2

3 to

'7

8 to

12

13

to 1

7

18

to 2

2

23

to 2

7

28

to 3

2

33

an

d m

ore

Difference between book counts

Nu

mb

er

of

ca

se

s

17

CHAPTER 3



In 438 out of the 980 cases (combinations of school, grade, subject and textbook title), or 44.7%, the number of books

counted in the Survey corresponded with the number reported on Textbook Control Form .01 within ±2 books. In

77.4% of the cases, the numbers agreed within ±12 books. These percentages represent the estimated percentages

within which the stock on hand was reported correctly within the stated limits. The average difference was an

insignificant 0.5 books over-reporting, while the standard deviation was 22.6.

3.1.5 School level analysis

Certain schools are very diligent in reporting textbook numbers, while other schools were careless or might even

have knowingly provided false data. Motives for deliberate false reporting could be hiding stock losses or attempts to

obtain more books.

An analysis was made of the average differences in book counts in each school, comparing the Survey count to the

Textbook Control Form .03 count, to determine whether the data suggest such behavior.

The average differences in book counts were calculated for each school by calculating the difference between the

number reported on Textbook Control Form .03 and the number counted in the sample Survey for each book title.

In the chart “Number of schools according to their average difference in stock counts”, the “normal” average was

calculated where a positive difference for one title would to some extent balance a negative difference for another

title. Schools which exaggerated their counts for most titles would show a positive average difference, and vice versa

for schools which under-reported on most titles.

The second chart shows the distribution of schools according to the average absolute differences. The absolute value

of the difference in counts was calculated for each book title, i.e., positive and negative differences were treated as

“the same.” The purpose of this chart is to give some indication of the incorrect reporting.

Difference between stock on hand reported and the corresponding stock counted in survey

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

-33

and

less

-32

to -

28

-27

to -

23

-22

to -

18

-17

to -

13

-12

to -

8

-7 to

-3

-2 to

2

3 to

'7

8 to

12

13 to

17

18 to

22

23 to

27

28 to

32

33 a

nd m

ore

Differences between book counts

Nu

mb

er o

f ca

ses

18

CHAPTER 3



It should be noted that these charts show numbers of schools, whereas the above charts showed numbers of book

counts per book title, grade, subject and school. The patterns suggested by the charts may, thus, be different, as small

schools with only a few titles have the same “weight” in the charts below as large schools with many book titles.

The above charts show that most (78.6%) of the schools had an average difference in the book counts between -7.5

and 7.5. In 43.6% of the schools the difference was between -2.5 and 2.5. There seemed to be a tendency in several

Number of schools according to their average difference in stock counts

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

-27

.49

- -

22

.5

-22

.49

- -

17

.5

-17

.49

- -

12

.5

-12

.49

- -

7.5

-7.4

9 -

-2

.5

-2.4

9 -

2.5

2.5

1 -

7.5

7.5

1 -

12

.5

12

.51

- 1

7.5

17

.51

- 2

2.5

22

.51

- 2

7.5

27

.51

- 3

2.5

Average difference betw een book counts

Nu

mb

er o

f sc

ho

ols

Number of schools according to their average absolute difference in stock counts

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0-5

5.1

-10

10

.1-1

5

15

.1-2

0

20

.1-2

5

25

.1-3

0

30

.1-3

5

35

.1-4

0

40

.1-4

5

45

.1-5

0

50

.1-5

5

Average absolute difference betw een book counts

Nu

mb

er o

f sc

ho

ols

19

CHAPTER 3



schools to report more books than the number of books counted in the Survey. In general, the first chart does not

suggest any large scale deliberate incorrect reporting in either direction.

Analyzing the average absolute differences in counts, as shown in the chart “Number of schools according to their

average absolute difference in stock counts”, indicates that the counts were not very accurate in general. Only 26% of

the sample schools (31 out of the 117 which could be compared) had an average absolute difference in counts of less

than 5.

3.1.6 Conclusions

This section, the analysis of the quantitative data, has indicated a number of shortcomings in the forms and in the

data entry system. Most of these only emerged during data analysis. A considerable amount of time was required to

detect these shortcomings and to make the necessary corrections where possible. Measures for avoiding such defi-

ciencies in future routine operations of the MoE have been suggested in the recommendations in chapter 5. With

those improvements, the accuracy would meet the requirements for book orders and reliable stock control.

While the current accuracy is relatively high in view of the fact that new forms and a new data entry tool were

introduced, teething problems were experienced. These seem to be the source of the relatively few cases of large

differences between Textbook Control Form data and the counts of the 10% Sample Survey.

The analyses do not suggest any considerable deliberate incorrect reporting by schools.

The extent to which the accuracy of the data reported by schools meets the needs of the MoE and the MCA depends

on the purpose the data are used for, and the level of accuracy required by the users:

As a general indication of the level of provision of textbooks, the accuracy is adequate, considering that over- and

under-reporting was observed.

The observed differences between the data sets, and the reported deficiencies of the data entry system, suggest

that there will be some mistakes in the book orders. Measures for correcting such mistakes when they are re-

ported by schools need to be devised. Considering that book orders were still received from schools after the start

of the final data processing, it can safely be assumed that any excess books ordered due to such mistakes will be

required by other schools.

The Textbook Control Form .03 data can be used as a interim basis for developing a book stock record system with

the proviso that the data must be verified during the first stock counts utilizing the system.

20

CHAPTER 3



3.2.1 Provision of textbooks: Ratios between learners and textbooks

The textbook data collected during the 10% Sample Survey differentiated between books in use, i.e., books used by

the learners, and books stored, and thus for all practical purposes not accessible to the learners at the time of the

Survey. The books were further classified according to their condition, using the categories of Textbook Control Form

.01: Good, fair, poor and write-off.

The ratios of book provision were calculated for all textbooks found in the schools, indicated below as “All books.”

and for the textbooks approved for use in schools, indicated as “Approved books only.” As the study was undertaken

in 2009, the book catalog entries from the 2007 to 2009 catalogs were taken as approved books.

3.2 Analyses of the data collected in the 10% Sample Survey

21

CHAPTER 3



Table 6: Enrolments, textbook stock and Learner:Book ratios – All books

Grade Subject Enrolment Total stock in

use or stored

Total stock in

use only

Stock excl

write-off in

use or stored

Stock excl

write-off in

use only

Learners:books

Stock in use or

stored

Learners:books

Stock in use

only

Grade 1 English 5 254 4 781 3 440 4 520 3 264 1.1 1.5

Grade 1 Environmental Studies 5 252 5 213 3 640 4 752 3 232 1.0 1.4

Grade 1 Mathematics 5 254 2 818 2 211 2 577 1 971 1.9 2.4

Grade 2 English 5 000 4 183 3 055 3 773 2 705 1.2 1.6



Grade 3 English 5 071 4 397 3 728 3 924 3 305 1.2 1.4



Grade 4 English 4 874 4 240 3 491 3 855 3 172 1.1 1.4



Grade 5 English 5 572 4 915 3 476 4 567 3 190 1.1 1.6


Grade 5 Natural Science and Health 5 571 6 282 3 651 5 755 3 274 0.9 1.5

22

CHAPTER 3




use or stored

Total stock in

use only

Stock excl

write-off in

use or stored

Stock excl

write-off in

use only

Learners:books

Stock in use or

stored

Learners:books

Stock in use

only

Education

Grade 6 English 4 798 3 739 2 785 3 450 2 563 1.3 1.7


Grade 6 Natural Science and Health

Education 4 795 5 435 3 402 5 029 3 097 0.9 1.4

Grade 7 English 4 658 3 974 3 073 3 703 2 848 1.2 1.5


Grade 7 Natural Science and Health

Education 4 657 4 775 3 265 4 339 2 991 1.0 1.4

Grade 8 English 5 008 3 563 2 165 3 407 2 045 1.4 2.3

Grade 8 Life Science 5 013 2 321 1 766 1 969 1 531 2.2 2.8


Grade 8 Physical Science 5 010 3 589 1 938 3 212 1 739 1.4 2.6

Grade 9 English 4 030 2 706 1 881 2 627 1 839 1.5 2.1




23

CHAPTER 3




use or stored

Total stock in

use only

Stock excl

write-off in

use or stored

Stock excl

write-off in

use only

Learners:books

Stock in use or

stored

Learners:books

Stock in use

only

Grade 10 English 3 527 4 740 3 102 4 566 2 952 0.7 1.1




Grade 11 Biology 1 133 897 817 782 702 1.3 1.4

Grade 11 English 1 744 1 271 743 937 625 1.4 2.3

Grade 11 Mathematics 1 330 1 768 1 004 1 755 991 0.8 1.3

Grade 11 Physical Science 794 1 791 1 055 1 709 1 005 0.4 0.8

Grade 12 Biology 770 1 303 949 1 120 769 0.6 0.8

Grade 12 English 1 242 1 529 1 013 1 366 859 0.8 1.2

Grade 12 Mathematics 725 1 661 893 1 615 863 0.4 0.8

Grade 12 Physical Science 660 1 817 861 1 803 850 0.4 0.8

24

CHAPTER 3



Table 7 Enrolments, textbook stock and Learner:Book ratios – Approved books only


use or stored

Total stock in

use only

Stock excl

write-off in

use or stored

Stock excl

write-off in

use only

Learners:books

Stock in use or

stored

Learners:books

Stock in use

only

Grade 1 English 1st Language, Grade 1-12 5 254 4 740 3 402 4 498 3 245 1.1 1.5



Grade 2 English 5 000 4 178 3 050 3 773 2 705 1.2 1.6



Grade 3 English 5 071 4 377 3 708 3 905 3 286 1.2 1.4



Grade 4 English 4 874 4 215 3 469 3 831 3 151 1.2 1.4



Grade 5 English 5 572 4 915 3 476 4 567 3 190 1.1 1.6


Grade 5 Natural Science and Health Educa- 5 571 5 885 3 464 5 428 3 122 0.9 1.6

25

CHAPTER 3




use or stored

Total stock in

use only

Stock excl

write-off in

use or stored

Stock excl

write-off in

use only

Learners:books

Stock in use or

stored

Learners:books

Stock in use

only

tion

Grade 6 English 4 798 3 714 2 778 3 425 2 556 1.3 1.7


Grade 6 Natural Science and Health Educa-

tion 4 795 5 435 3 402 5 029 3 097 0.9 1.4

Grade 7 English 4 658 3 937 3 073 3 666 2 848 1.2 1.5


Grade 7 Natural Science and Health Educa-

tion 4 657 4 301 3 003 3 953 2 770 1.1 1.6

Grade 8 English 5 008 3 563 2 165 3 407 2 045 1.4 2.3

Grade 8 Life Science 5 013 1 216 945 1 201 931 4.1 5.3



Grade 9 English 4 030 2 706 1 881 2 627 1 839 1.5 2.1




26

CHAPTER 3




use or stored

Total stock in

use only

Stock excl

write-off in

use or stored

Stock excl

write-off in

use only

Learners:books

Stock in use or

stored

Learners:books

Stock in use

only

Grade 10 English 3 527 4 740 3 102 4 566 2 952 0.7 1.1




Grade 11 Biology 1 133 371 371 305 305 3.1 3.1

Grade 11 English 1 744 1 271 743 937 625 1.4 2.3

Grade 11 Mathematics 1 330 1 699 1 003 1 686 990 0.8 1.3


Grade 12 Biology 770 1 001 653 945 600 0.8 1.2

Grade 12 English 1 242 1 505 989 1 342 835 0.8 1.3

Grade 12 Mathematics 725 1 657 889 1 611 859 0.4 0.8

Grade 12 Physical Science 660 1 817 861 1 803 850 0.4 0.8

27

CHAPTER 3



Except for grades 10 to 12, the above tables indicate that the average number of learners sharing a textbook in a

subject in a particular grade ranged between 1.0 and 2.9, counting all textbooks, that is, including those books

which should no longer be used. While these values are better than what is commonly perceived, it must be kept in

mind that these are average values. Some schools will have more books than they require, while in other schools

many learners are sharing textbooks.

Counting only approved books, the average ratios between learners and books indicated that the average supply of

approved books is not adequate for providing an approved textbook to each learner in Grades 1 through 9. The

situation is better in grades 10 and 12, the grades in which learners sit for the public examinations.

The most important reasons offered by school principals for this situation were:

Learners are sharing books, where this can easily be done, to prolong the life of the textbook stock.

There was a recent delivery of books which were not issued to learners. (These books were assumedly delivered

for use in 2010 and arrived late in 2009.)

28

CHAPTER 4

Outcomes of the Key Informant Interviews and Focus Group Discussions


4 Outcomes of the Key Informant Interviews and Focus

Group Discussions

The Ministry of Education (MOE) developed a Textbook Policy (“Building a Learning Nation”) in 2008 to guide the

textbook supply chain in Namibia. The overall aim of the Textbook Policy is to pave the way forward for learners

in formal education to have equitable access to learning support materials (LSMs) to develop to their full potential

in order to make a meaningful contribution to economic development. One of the main strategies of the policy is to

re-design the management and administration of all parts of the supply chain and to put in place new sets of rules

for the performance targets to be achieved. The policy will adopt the following main strategies:

Develop a detailed action plan for the implementation of the improved, integrated textbook supply chain and

related policy priorities;

Establish an independent National Textbook Board which will guide all aspects of national textbook provision;

Improve numeracy and literacy standards by focusing on the provision of mother tongue literacy materials and

teacher training and support for Grades 1 – 3;

Review existing NIED policies on the curriculum reform cycle and its articulation with the timetable for new

LSMs development, field testing and publication;

Strengthen procurement: tendering and contracting for distributors;

Strengthen finance and budgeting;

Improve selection and management of LSMs by schools;

Improve monitoring and evaluation of the textbook supply chain;

Set targets for textbook to learner ratios.

The following institutions of the MoE are involved in the textbook supply chain together with the textbook suppli-

ers:

NIED,

Directorate of General Services,

SCMU,

Regional Education Offices,

Circuit Education Offices and

Schools.

At the time of the Survey, the supply chain was as listed below. The critical steps have been included in a Gantt

Chart on page 30.

4.1 Background to the Textbook Ordering Process

29

CHAPTER 4



Compilation and distribution of the annual Textbook Catalog:

Call for submissions by publishers;

Planning textbook evaluation meetings;

Publishers submit materials for inclusion in catalog;

Textbook evaluation committees under the auspices of NIED evaluate and approve submissions;

Finalization of the textbook catalog;

Printing of the textbook catalog;

Catalogues are distributed to schools via the REOs and circuit inspectors;

Publishers market textbooks at regional, circuit and school levels.

Selection of textbooks by schools and placement of requisitions:

Schools select textbooks from the catalog.

Schools place requisitions with circuit inspectors.

Circuit inspectors send requisitions from schools to REOs.

Quotations requested from distributors and sent to REO.

REOs send regionally compiled requisitions to MoE.

MoE orders textbooks from distributors.

Printing of textbooks.

Delivery of Textbooks:

Textbooks delivered to distributors by publishers.

Textbooks delivered to schools by distributors.

Schools sign and stamp delivery notes and send to REOs.

REOs send quotations and delivery notes to MoE.

MoE makes payment to distributors.

4.2.1 Introduction

After some general remarks on the process, this subsection of the report describes levels of awareness of the

textbook procurement process; changes of book orders by regional education offices; delivery of textbooks; effec-

tiveness and efficiency of the ordering process; budget allocation at school level; and recommendations. It should

be kept in mind that the opinions reported here may to some extent be based on inadequately informed percep-

tions, especially at the school level. In such cases, the remedy would be better information and training, rather

than changing the procedures.

The responses to most questions have been tabulated, starting with Table 8 on page 32.

4.2 Management of the Textbook Procurement Process

30

CHAPTER 4



4.2.2 General remarks on the textbook ordering process

One statement made by several respondents at the national level should precede the discussion of the ordering

process: The procedures exist and they are generally good. They just have to be implemented (or followed). The

general tenor was that the main problems were not associated with the procedures as such, but with the imple-

mentation on the ground.

The annual process of textbook procurement follows a critical path, which can be seriously hampered by delays at

any point in the process. Some Informants, thus, stressed the importance of all involved parties adhering to the

annual program. For example, schools submitting their requisitions late either held up the whole process, or they

caused additional delivery trips or even additional reprints of books, thus increasing costs.

An illustrative Gantt chart of the critical path of the annual textbook procurement process was drawn up, based on

some KI responses and the Textbook Policy (see overleaf). The purpose of the chart is to show the time-critical

process, rather than providing a fixed program. It is recommended that the Ministry, in consultation with all

parties involved, annually draws up such a program.

One of the most critical dates in the process is the release of funds by the Ministry of Finance, as textbook orders

cannot be placed by the Ministry of Education before the funds are available. (Comment by the Consultant: It

seems to be essential that all schools submit their textbook requisitions to the Circuit Offices before the start of the

May school holidays. Inspectors would have to be available during the holidays for verifying the requisitions.)

There was a suggestion to consider establishing a textbook fund from which textbooks could be ordered before the

Ministry of Finance had released funds for this purpose. The budgeted funds would then be used for replenishing

the textbook fund later in the year.

The Gantt chart also incorporates one of the KI responses, recommending that the time between the completion of

a textbook and its first utilization in schools be kept as short as possible. This would require some final textbook

evaluations and approvals early in the year. The time allowed in the Gantt chart for textbook evaluation is very

short to accommodate the KIs recommendation. It might be advantageous to start the process in September of the

previous year to complete the approval of textbooks by end-October or in November. The dates on which the

textbook budget amount is published, and when textbook funds are released by the Ministry of Finance are the

most defining moments in the process.

31

CHAPTER 4



Ill

us

tra

tiv

e G

an

tt C

ha

rt o

f t

he

Crit

ica

l P

ath

in

th

e A

nn

ua

l T

ex

tb

oo

k P

ro

cu

re

me

nt P

ro

ce

ss

tiv

e d

ura

tio

ns h

av

e b

ee

n i

nd

ica

te

d i

n w

ee

ks

32

CHAPTER 4



4.2.3 Textbook catalog

There seemed to be general appreciation for the textbook catalog. Issues raised were perceived as recommenda-

tions for improving the catalog, rather than a negative critique.

The catalogs have improved over the past years. Previously, schools used up to four catalogs from which to choose

textbooks. Subsequently, these four catalogs were condensed into one catalog. This made the selection process

easier. However, several respondents at the school level complained that the catalog still included too many titles,

complicating the selection of books.

Several respondents mentioned that the number of different titles for a subject in a specific grade should be re-

stricted. A wide choice of books seemed to contribute towards schools ordering different books for the same

subject. When regional offices then reduced the orders, as they exceeded the school’s budget, these schools ended

up with different learners in a class using different titles.

It was recommended that there should be a clear policy on what is to be included in the catalog and what not. This

policy should then be adhered to. As an example of an inconsistency, supplementary materials were mentioned,

where some were included against the policy, while others were not. In this respect it was also recommended that

supplementary materials, if included at all, should be clearly identified, as schools are often not aware of which

entries represented such materials.

Books which should no longer be ordered should be removed from the catalog. There were reportedly still a signifi-

cant number of such books listed.

The distinction between learner and teacher materials was not always clear to the schools. Teacher materials were

at times listed among learner materials, and vice versa. Many teachers were not in a position to acquaint them-

selves with new titles and were, thus, not in a position to classify these titles themselves.

It was suggested to move the publication date of the catalog from December or January to March or early April to

allow the latest titles to be included (see also subsection 4.2.2.). It would, though, be important to ensure that the

catalogs were in schools early in April.

Publishers should be held responsible for verifying the correctness of their entries, especially of the ISBNs, book

titles and prices. There were reports of incorrect entries, such as incorrect ISBNs. All prices should include value

added tax (VAT). The publishers should also ensure that only titles which could actually be delivered, are listed.

The person responsible for entering the catalog in the database should have the required technical skills. If re-

quired, adequate training should be provided. Finally, respondents recommended that the layout of the catalog be

improved, as a number of users seemed to have problems using the catalog.

4.2.4 Awareness of the textbook ordering process at different levels

To avoid Key Informants (KIs) just claiming that they were well informed about the ordering process, they were

requested to describe the process. The general responses summarized below are, thus, not an authoritative state-

ment of the correct procedure. Due to the composition of the sample, the procedure outlined is likely to mainly

represent the procedure followed in primary schools.

33

CHAPTER 4



Generally, KIs indicated that the ordering and delivering processes was as follows: Normally a date for ordering is

set by the inspector and conveyed to the schools. The principals and teachers then have a ‘textbook ordering’

meeting where they decide on the titles of textbooks per subject per grade and the number of textbooks needed.

Textbooks are selected from the Textbook Catalogue. Individual schools hand their order/requisition forms to their

respective circuit inspectors. Inspectors verify the order forms and pass them on to the regional education offices

(REOs). REOs then verify the orders and pass them on to the Ministry’s head office, which then orders the books

from the distributors.

KIs indicated that the MoE contracts one or two suppliers/distributors for textbook supply and delivery. The

distributor normally delivers books directly to the school. The supplier comes to a school with an issuance voucher

listing textbooks to be delivered. Further details of book deliveries are discussed under 3.6 below.

At the national level a textbook evaluation committee holds evaluation meetings where different teacher and

learner support materials are evaluated with the purpose of preparing textbook catalogs. NIED is responsible for

ensuring that textbooks and materials included in textbook catalogs cover current syllabi and curricula. Publishers

then market the textbooks at regional, circuit and school levels before schools select their textbooks. The MoE head

office takes ordering forms from regional offices and passes these on to the selected suppliers for printing and

distribution of the textbooks.

KIs were asked about the extent to which they were informed about the process and procedures for ordering

textbooks. All regional education officers interviewed and responsible for textbook procurement indicated that

they were very well informed about the process and procedures for ordering textbooks. However, only half of the

circuit inspectors who were interviewed indicated that they were well informed, with close to one out of three

inspectors (11 out of 37) indicating they were either not well informed or not informed at all. Half of the school

officers responsible for textbook procurement indicated that they were well or very well informed, while the other

half indicated that they were not well informed or not informed at all. Please see Table 8 for details.

Table 8: How well officers are informed about the text book ordering process

Number of responses at different levels

Response

Region Circuit School

Very well 12 18 40

Well 0 8 29

Not well 0 8 38

Not at all 0 3 27

Total 12 37 134

Those inspectors who were well and very well informed indicated that they attended a one-day workshop where

procurement procedures were explained. The workshop covered textbook procurement, monitoring, record keep-

ing and handling of textbooks. This workshop was also supposed to be held at the school level, but this had not

happened by the time of data collection. Some of those who indicated that they were well-informed stated that

34

CHAPTER 4



they needed more information on the ‘new’ system of ordering books. Some inspectors indicated that they were

no longer actively involved in the ordering of textbooks as this was done directly by the schools.

Inspectors who did not attend this workshop seemed to be the ones who were not well informed about procure-

ment of textbooks. One indicated that he only knew the basics of procuring textbooks, from the time when he had

been a principal. Some of these inspectors attended a workshop on procurement four years previously, but felt

there was a need for another workshop as new procedures had come into play. Many of the inspectors indicated

that they did not know about the process from the regional to the national level. Many of the inspectors also

indicated that they were not aware of what works well and not well at the regional, national and supplier levels as

they were not involved at these levels.

4.2.5 Change of book orders at regional education offices

Close to half of the school interviewees indicated that REOs did not change book orders as prepared by the schools.

However, one-third indicated that regional education offices did change textbook orders without consulting the

schools. Just over half of the regional office and circuit inspector interviewees agreed that textbook orders were

not changed by regional offices. The remaining regional office interviewees indicated that they did change text-

book orders, but only in consultation with the schools. Please see Table 9 for details.

Regional offices have a certain budget for ordering textbooks for the region. This budget is based on a unit cost per

learner. When changes are made by regional offices, it is based on this budgetary unit cost.

Table 9: Regional offices change school textbook orders


Response


No 7 20 60

Yes, but consult with schools first 5 11 22

Yes, and without consulting the schools 0 3 45

Don’t know 0 3 5

Total 12 37 132

4.2.6 Delivery of textbooks

In general, distributors delivered textbooks directly to the schools. Books purchased through ETSIP were delivered

to regional warehouses, and the regional offices had to deliver them to schools. This worked out reasonably well in

some cases, and not well in others. The distributors seemed to have the required infrastructure for delivering

books to schools, while this proved to be problematic for several regional offices.

Problems reported in this respect were book deliveries after school hours. The school principal or teacher responsi-

ble for textbook orders was at times not available for receiving and checking deliveries when the school was closed.

On the other hand, limiting deliveries to school hours would prolong the process and increase the delivery costs.

35

CHAPTER 4



The process of delivering textbooks was not always as smooth as it should be. It was learned that the supplier

usually delivered textbooks directly to the school, while textbooks that were processed by the Ministry or the

government stores were usually delivered at the regional education office or the circuit inspectors’ office. All of the

regions had experienced a situation where the supplier did not deliver textbooks directly to the school, or where

government stores via NIED delivered the textbooks to the regional or circuit inspectors’ office. In some cases the

REO would send a truck full of books to be delivered to schools, in other cases inspectors would pick up the books

from the regional office and deliver them to schools. While most deliveries did take place from supplier to schools,

cases were reported where textbooks were delivered to regional and circuit inspectors’ offices. In cases where

delays were experienced, some school principals picked up the textbooks themselves using private transport.

Deliveries are verified by the recipient at the school together with the person delivering the books, comparing the

delivered titles and quantities to the delivery note. Ideally book deliveries should be verified by the staff member

responsible for ordering textbooks. This was not always possible, especially when deliveries were made after

school hours. According to the policy, delivery notes have to be signed and stamped by the school before payment

can be made.

Almost all of the interviewees complained that suppliers did not always deliver the right number of textbooks to

schools. This impression seemed to have been created largely by the changes which regional offices made to book

orders without informing the schools. It was reported that schools often did not understand the meaning of “back

orders,” which referred to books which still had to be delivered. This led to some confusion and contributed to-

wards allegations of incorrect deliveries.

Delivery of textbooks was always a problem during the rainy season, especially in regions where severe floods are

experienced and to schools in remote areas. Additional challenges experienced during delivery of textbooks were:

Delivery of textbooks to the wrong school.

Delivery of insufficient number of textbooks.

Late delivery of textbooks.

KIs were asked what worked well and what did not work well during the procurement process at the school,

circuit, regional, national and supplier levels. Their responses are consolidated in Table 10.

Table 10: What works well and what does not work well in the procurement of textbooks

Level What works well What does not work well

School

Schools are able to make their own

textbook selection based on their needs

Direct deliveries of textbooks are much

better than delivery at regional level

Having a catalog that outlines all necessary

information such as titles of textbooks,

ISBN numbers, and prices

Schools have variety of textbooks to choose

from

No clear guidelines on the budget allocation

for textbooks per school

Lack of control mechanisms for ordering and

receiving textbooks

Schools not ordering books on time

Schools using old catalogs in absence of new

catalogs

Circuit Circuit inspectors strive to ensure that

textbooks are delivered on time

Lack of control over ordering of textbooks at

school level

Not sufficiently involved in ordering

36

CHAPTER 4



Level What works well What does not work well

Schools not submitting testbook order forms

on time

Sometimes deliveries are made at circuit

level and not to schools

No clear guidelines on the budget allocation

for textbooks per school

Region Good advice and support is provided to

circuits and schools

Not sufficiently involved in ordering

Lack of direct communication with schools

Lack of coordination of the ordering process

Delays in ordering– late orders resulted in

late deliveries and, in general, had a negative

impact on the printing and delivery

processes

National level corresponds directly with

schools instead of going via the regional

office

National

Having an updated catalog with all

necessary information

Schools have variety of textbooks to choose

from

Subject advisors are well informed about

the best textbooks for subjects

Good oversight of textbook delivery

Textbook order form is well designed

Subject advisors decide on the titles of

textbooks

Budget allocation for textbooks very

inadequate

Catalogs are confusing, especially since there

seem to be many different catalogs

Rapid changes in textbook titles

Suppliers

Direct delivery to schools is more efficient

Procedures for certifying that books were

actually delivered (as long as schools

diligently verified deliveries)

Wrong textbooks delivered

Wrong number of textbooks delivered,

usually fewer than ordered. (Impression at

times caused by regional offices reducing the

orders without informing schools)

Sometimes suppliers do not have sufficient

quantities of books in stock for deliveries

Mix-up of textbooks

Deliveries during rainy season problematic

Late deliveries

Some textbooks in catalog not printed yet

Suppliers do not provide a delivery

programme; as a result schools do not know

the date when books will be delivered

Catalogues are confusing, especially since

there seem to be many different catalogs

Variety of books to choose from too wide

Too many suppliers visiting schools and

inspectors’ offices

FGD participants were asked if they usually received textbooks at the beginning of the school year. Almost all

FGDs (21 out of 26) indicated that they did receive textbooks at the beginning of the year. However, most FGDs

indicated that they did not receive textbooks for all subjects, and certainly not textbooks for all learners at the

beginning of the year. Many learners had to share textbooks, others could only access textbooks in class because

they were not allowed to take them home. Most FGDs (7 out of 13) in secondary schools indicated that they did not

37

CHAPTER 4



receive mathematics textbooks at the beginning of the year, while most FGD participants in primary schools did

receive mathematics textbooks. Only three out of 13 FGDs in secondary schools reported having received English

textbooks at the beginning of the year, while half of the FGDs in primary schools received theirs. Learners were

doing much better in terms of science textbooks, with more than half (eight out of 13 in secondary and seven out of

13 in primary schools) of the FGDs reporting having received science textbooks at the beginning of the school year.

Those FGD participants in secondary and primary schools who reported not having received their textbooks at the

beginning of the year indicated that they usually had to wait on average until the middle of the school year to

receive their books. Some did not receive books for the entire school year.

Delays in Delivery of Textbooks According to Key Informant Interviews

Three-quarters of the regional level KIs felt that the ordering process had very often resulted in delayed deliveries

of textbooks, while one quarter indicated that it did not often result in delays. Half of the circuit inspectors who

were interviewed felt that the ordering process very often resulted in delays, one quarter felt that it often resulted

in delays, while the others felt that it never resulted in delays. At school level, almost half of the interviewees felt

that it very often resulted in delays, one fifth felt that it often resulted in delays, and one third felt that the process

did not result in delays. Please see Table 11 for details. The different distributions observed for the three levels may

be explained by their different perspectives: school principals reflect on the experience of their school, while

inspectors and regional officers have all schools in their circuit or region in mind.

Table 11: Results of ineffectiveness and inefficiency in the textbook procurement process: Frequency of delays


Response


Very often

(delays were experienced every year in past 5 years) 9 19 57

Often

(delays were experienced two or three times in past 5 years) 0 10 29

Not very often

(delays were experienced never or only once in the past 5 years) 3 6 47

Don’t know 0 2 1

Total 12 37 134

Interviewees were asked what they thought was the effect of the present process of ordering textbooks on the

actual provision of textbooks to schools. More than half of the circuit inspectors interviewed, close to two-thirds of

the school representatives interviewed, and three-quarters of the regional interviewees felt that the current

process of ordering textbooks has resulted in more than two learners sharing a textbook. Please see Table 12 for

details.

38

CHAPTER 4



Table 12: The Effect of the present ordering process on theprovision of textbooks to schools: Adequacy of provision


Response


Very inadequate (more than 2 learners sharing a textbook) 9 22 80

Inadequate (two learners sharing a textbook) 2 5 24

Adequate[most learners have textbooks] 1 5 20

Wasteful (more than one tenth of the textbooks are not used) 0 0 2

Very wasteful (more than 1 out of 5 textbooks are not used) 0 0 0

Differs widely for different textbooks; cannot be generalized 0 4 5

Respondent is not informed about the situation (the effect) 0 1 2

Total 12 37 133

Only one out of 12 regional KIs, five out of 37 circuit and 20 out 133 school level KIs felt that the current ordering

process resulted in most learners having textbooks. Some interviewees indicated that the inadequacy was worse

for subjects such as history and geography, while subjects such as English, mathematics and science were better

off since these textbooks were provided via the ETSIP. Other effects mentioned by KIs were:

Learning process hampered as teachers did not have the necessary teaching materials.

Teachers fell behind on completing their syllabi.

Learners had to share textbooks which challenged the entire learning experience for the affected subject.

There were a few interviewees at the regional level who felt that the late delivery of textbooks did not affect the

learning process as teachers made use of other materials for teaching in the absence of textbooks. However, some

countered this argument, saying that many schools did not have teacher support materials. Others felt that

sometimes teachers used their own initiative in the absence of textbooks, but these initiatives could lack relevance

to the syllabus.

4.2.7 Effectiveness of the ordering process

Most of the KIs at regional, circuit and school levels felt that the ordering process was not effective in terms of the

right numbers of textbooks delivered to schools. Close to two thirds of the circuit and school level interviews and

three quarters of regional KIs indicated that the ordering process has resulted in more than two learners having to

share textbooks. Only a few of the respondents agreed that most learners have textbooks. Only two of the school

level KIs and none of the regional and circuit level KIs agreed that more than one tenth of the textbooks were not

used. Please see Table 13 for more details.

39

CHAPTER 4



Table 13: Effect of present process of ordering on the provision of textbooks to schools


Response


More than 2 learners sharing a textbook 9 22 80

Two learners sharing a textbook 2 5 24

Most learners have textbooks 1 5 20

More than one tenth of the textbooks are not used 0 0 2

More than 1 out of 5 textbooks are not used 0 0 0

Differs widely for different textbooks; cannot be generalized 0 4 5

Respondent is not informed about the situation 0 1 2

Total 12 37 133

KIs were asked the following questions, “How effective and efficient is the process of verifying that textbooks

claimed by the suppliers to have been delivered to schools, have actually arrived at the schools”. Two regional level

KIs, two circuit level KIs and five school level KIs opted not to respond to this question because they claimed not to

be aware of the effectiveness or efficiency of the verification of textbooks claimed to have been delivered. Of those

who responded to this question, more than half of the regional level interviewees felt that the verification process

was effective but not efficient. The circuit level KIs were split, with one third reporting that it was either very

effective and efficient or just effective and efficient; while one third felt that it was neither effective nor efficient.

Only two out of 35 felt that it was very ineffective and very inefficient. A similar trend was followed at the school

level; however, close to one third of the school level respondents agreed that the verification process was very

effective and very efficient. The data are presented in Table 14 below.

Table 14: Effectiveness and efficiency of textbook verification process


Response


Very effective and very efficient 0 6 40

Effective and efficient 1 5 29

Very effective but not efficient 6 9 20

Not effective and not efficient 2 11 27

Very ineffective and very inefficient 1 2 15

Don’t know 0 2 1

Total 10 35 132

40

CHAPTER 4



Reasons for ineffectiveness and inefficiency of textbook procurement process

Those interviewees who felt that the system was not effective and efficient gave the following reasons:

Schools were not well informed about the ordering process.

Regional offices indicated that they had control over the process from the schools to the suppliers, but did not

have control over the process from the suppliers to the schools.

The verification processes were not followed properly.

The budget allocation for textbooks was insufficient.

Textbooks that had not yet been printed appeared in catalogs.

Schools did not place orders on time.

The national office did not place orders with the suppliers in time.

Suppliers could not keep up with the deliveries, or had too many orders to handle.

Suppliers did not have sufficient quantities of textbooks in supply, and had to wait for the printers when they

ran short.

Some books were ordered from outside the country, which was time-consuming.

Suppliers dropped textbooks at regional and circuit inspectors’ offices and not directly at schools.

Some schools were in remote areas and difficult to access.

Suppliers allowed anyone at the school to sign for the delivery of textbooks and not necessarily the person

responsible for ordering.

Textbooks that were not delivered at the beginning of the year were in most cases delivered only at the end of

the school year or the following year.

Delivery records did not always correspond with textbook orders.

Suppliers did not communicate with schools about the late or non-delivery of textbooks.

Sometimes payments for textbooks were made, even when the right numbers of textbooks had not been

delivered. This resulted in suppliers delivering the remaining books in ‘portions’. It was also claimed that de-

livering of textbooks in portions was sometimes done deliberately as suppliers were paid separately for driving

to schools.

Invoices to suppliers were paid, even in cases where textbook orders did not correspond with delivery records.

Curriculum changes.

4.2.8 Budget for procuring textbooks at school level

The Textbook Policy indicated that the enrolment data from the latest Education Management Information System

(EMIS) 15th day school Survey or annual census should be used to calculate the textbook capitation allowance.

The current system is that a budgetary allocation of approximately N$30 is made per learner for textbooks (all

textbooks per learner). Almost all of the interviewees were aware of the school budget for purposes of procuring

textbooks, although one quarter of the schools indicated that they did not have a budget or that they did not know

of a budget. However, KIs indicated that one textbook can sometimes cost N$90.00 or more. The budgetary

41

CHAPTER 4



allocation of N$30 per learner for textbooks was therefore regarded as unrealistic by almost all interviewees at

national, regional, circuit and school levels.

Recommendations for an improved textbook procurement process

Interviewees were asked what could be done to improve the textbook procurement process at the school, circuit,

regional, national and supplier levels. Various recommendations were provided, which are compiled into the list

below.

School level

Schools should be allowed to order directly from suppliers.

Schools should appoint an administrator specifically responsible for ordering of books.

Schools should be allowed to follow up on their orders directly with the suppliers.

Teachers should not be burdened with ordering of textbooks as they need to concentrate on teaching and not

administrative duties.

Schools should place their orders in a timely manner.

Schools should put simple and understandable mechanisms in place for ordering of textbooks.

The ordering process needs to be done directly from the schools to the suppliers. The middle men confuse the

process.

Schools should send order and delivery forms to inspectors.

Schools should do regular stock-taking of textbooks and not wait until the end of the year.

Only the person responsible for textbook orders, principal, or head of department should sign for the receipt of

textbooks from suppliers.

Circuit level

Inspectors should do regular follow-up during the entire ordering process to verify ordering and delivering of

textbooks.

The education circuit office should appoint a full-time person to deal only with ordering of textbooks.

Inspectors should become more actively involved in the ordering process.

Circuit inspectors should organize a workshop during the school holidays to inform schools about the ordering

process. Inspectors need to ensure that schools are well versed in the ordering process of textbooks.

Transport should be provided to teachers who travel to the inspectors’ offices for ordering purposes.

Transport should be provided to inspectors who are expected to deliver textbooks to schools.

Inspectors should also visit remote schools for follow-up.

Inspectors should ensure that schools have up to date catalogs.

Circuit inspector need to participate actively in the verification process.

Inspectors should do regular auditing of the number of textbooks at schools.

42

CHAPTER 4



Regional level

Advisory teachers should provide support to schools in selecting textbooks, because of the wide variety of

textbooks to choose from in each subject.

Advisory teachers should be responsible for ordering the books.

The regional education office should appoint a full-time person to deal only with ordering of textbooks.

Regular monitoring and follow-up should be done throughout the ordering process.

Regional offices should provide order forms in a timely manner.

Regional offices should ensure that circuit inspectors have up to date catalogs.

Regional Directors should become more involved in the textbook ordering process.

Verification processes are in place, but need to be implemented.

More human resources are needed at the regional level.

Final verification of the ordering and delivering of textbooks should be done by the regional office.

The regional office should have a database of books ordered and books delivered and compare this with the

number of learners per school.

National level

The budget allocation for textbooks should be increased, as prices of textbooks are extremely high.

Regular monitoring and follow-up should be done throughout the ordering process.

The national office should be more transparent about the process of ordering so that schools would better

understand the process.

The national office should pay the suppliers on time to avoid late delivery of textbooks.

The head office should send up to date catalogs to all regional offices, and ensure that these catalogs reach

schools.

Strengthen communication between head office and regional offices.

The head office should identify all loopholes in the system and develop strategies to remedy the defects.

Head office should accelerate the tendering process for textbooks.

The national office should have a database of books ordered and books delivered and compare this with the

number of learners per school.

The MoE should decentralize the textbook budget to the regional level, and increase budget allocation per

learner.

The MoE should appoint only one, or at the most two, suppliers.

The textbook policy document should be redrafted so as to be more easily understood.

43

CHAPTER 4



Supplier Level

Suppliers should deliver on time.

Suppliers should strengthen their monitoring process in collaboration with the Ministry so that the right

quantities of the right textbooks are delivered.

Suppliers should inform schools of delivery dates. They should prepare a delivery schedule and inform schools

accordingly.

Suppliers need to keep their promises that outstanding textbooks will be delivered.

Deliveries of textbooks should be made in the afternoons, when learners are not at school.

Suppliers should deliver textbooks during schools hours.

Suppliers should be accountable for late deliveries if they are at fault.

Suppliers should ensure that textbooks needed are printed in time.

Suppliers should ensure that textbooks are handed over to the person responsible for receiving textbooks.

4.3.1 Introduction

This section of the report will discuss the main findings from FGDs and KIIs with regards to sharing of textbooks;

consequences of sharing of textbooks; coping with the sharing of textbooks; and possibility to take textbooks

home.

4.3.2 Sharing of textbooks

Sharing of textbooks inside the classroom was not regarded as a major challenge when two learners shared a

textbook. However, the sharing of textbooks in the classroom was regarded as a challenge when more than two

learners shared a textbook. Sharing of textbooks (outside of the classroom) for purposes of doing homework and

studying for tests and examinations was a serious challenge to almost all learners who participated in the FGDs

and who had to share. The Textbook Policy (MoE, 2008:1) indicates that, “the provision of textbooks is inadequate

and seriously constrains the quality of education, especially at schools in disadvantaged and poor communities,

where buying a textbook is not an option as these are not easily available. English, mathematics and science are

identified as critical subjects that affect students’ overall performance”. The MoE’s plan is to achieve a 1:1 learner to

textbook ratio by 2013/2014.

4.3 Utilization of Textbooks

44

CHAPTER 4



The majority of the focus groups indicated that they shared textbooks for the three subjects, as indicated in Ta-

ble 15.

Table 15: Sharing of textbooks

Number of focus groups

Secondary schools Primary schoola Subject

Share textbooks Do not share

textbooks Share textbooks

Do not share

textbooks

Mathematics 9 4 10 3

English 9 4 11 2

Science 10 3 9 4

Total 28 11 30 9

More primary schools than secondary schools, according to the FGDs, shared mathematics and English textbooks,

while there was virtually no difference in the number of FGDs that indicated sharing of science textbooks. Never-

theless, more FGDs in both primary and secondary schools indicated the sharing of textbooks than not sharing

textbooks.

Sharing textbooks across class groups was even more of a challenge. In many of the schools class groups shared

textbooks, and in these cases textbooks were not allowed to be taken home. In many cases where textbooks were

not allowed to be taken home, four or more learners shared the same textbook.

Consequences of sharing of textbooks

FGD participants who shared textbooks indicated that the situation had a negative impact on their ability to study

and do homework. Sharing was difficult, because learners lived a long way away from one another. One FGD

participant in a secondary school stated that “some learners are beaten by teachers because they are not doing

their homework, while this is sometimes a result of sharing of books”. Learners sometimes have to copy text from

textbooks and find themselves in a situation where some learners write much faster than others. This, many FGD

participants in secondary schools said, could result in verbal or physical arguments. Most learners who share

textbooks indicated that it has resulted in them not completing their homework and failing some of their tests.

Three FGD participants in the same FGD indicated the following:

“It is impossible to do given activities on time.”

“The distance between learners sharing a textbook makes it impossible to do our homework after school.”

“Sharing of textbooks causes high failure rates at schools.”

45

CHAPTER 4



Learners sharing textbooks across class groups indicated that this affected their ability to use the books while in

school, because the next class group usually takes the books as soon as it is their turn, regardless of whether learn-

ers have completed their tasks or not. One learner said that, “this matter of textbook sharing makes it difficult for

us, because sometimes we want to take higher level, but because of the shortage of textbooks, we cannot”.

Sharing of books also leads to learners not taking care of the books. Some FGD participants who shared books

indicated that they did not feel responsible for the books as the books did not belong to them for the year. They

indicated that some learners deliberately damaged textbooks because they felt no sense of ownership of the books.

A limited number of FGD participants in secondary schools felt that sharing of textbooks was not a problem as

they were used to sharing textbooks and teachers explained the text well in class. However, these learners also felt

that the timeframe for homework was not sufficient for two or more learners to use the same textbook. A limited

number of learners indicated that they did not have problems with sharing textbooks because teachers made

copies from the textbooks for them, while other teachers distributed hand-outs.

Coping with sharing of textbooks

Learners in many schools were allowed to do homework or study at school in the afternoon. This arrangement

made the sharing of textbooks easier, because learners were together. Some learners (2 FGDs) felt constrained to

stay at school until about 16h00 mainly in order to share textbooks. In many cases learners borrowed textbooks

from friends in the same grade, but from different schools. However, this was more difficult for secondary school

learners, especially those doing senior secondary mathematics, as not all learners take mathematics. Another

strategy used to solve the challenge of sharing textbooks was to have one learner do his/her homework during

study time at school, while the other learner took the textbook home. Some learners also borrowed textbooks from

schools close to their homes in order to complete their work.

Some teachers gave summaries of the text in textbooks to allow learners to have something to take home. Other

teachers organized hand-outs (copies from textbooks) for learners to take home. Some teachers put questions on

the chalk board for learners to copy. The teacher then read from the textbook, allowing learners to listen to the text

and find answers to the questions. “Sometimes teachers are bored and just write things on the board that the

learners do not understand. It is therefore better to have own textbooks in order to look things up.” Most of the

text was only accessible when teachers wrote it on the chalk board. This, however, was inadequate because

learners needed to have access to the full text. Sometimes learners did not understand the summaries that were

provided for them and therefore needed textbooks for follow up.

Some learners indicated that they did “group studies”, which made the sharing of books much easier. Those

parents who were well-off purchased textbooks for their children so that they did not have to share with other

learners.

4.3.3 Taking textbooks home

Most of the FGDs with primary school learners indicated that they were not allowed to take textbooks home for

mathematics, English and science. Most of the FGDs with secondary school learners indicated that they were

allowed to take mathematics textbooks home, while the same was not true for English and science. Table 16 shows

the responses from the FGDs.

46

CHAPTER 4



Table 16: Extent to which learners were permitted to take textbooks home

Number of focus groups

Secondary schools Primary schools Subject

Could not take

textbooks home

Could take text-

books home

Could not take

textbooks home

Could take text-

books home

Mathematics 3 10 10 3

English 8 5 9 4

Science 6 7 9 4

Teachers did not allow learners to take textbooks home for the following reasons:

Insufficient textbooks.

Books could be damaged by rains or floods.

Books could be damaged through learners’ negligence.

Books could get lost.

Learners did not cover their textbooks for protection.

Some primary school learners in both FGDs in the Oshana region were not allowed to take their books home during

the wet season, for fear that the books might be damaged. They were, however, allowed to take the books home

when there was no threat of rain or floods.

Most learners indicated that the unavailability of textbooks when they were supposed to do homework and study

at home severely affected their homework and ability to pass their tests and examinations.

Some primary school learners indicated that the unavailability of textbooks at home was not a problem for them

as they used their exercise books for study. Others felt the situation did not affect their ability to study as teachers

provided them with handouts or sufficiently clear explanations in class. One primary school FGD indicated that

teachers did not give them any homework to do at home. All “homework” was completed in the classroom.

4.3.4 Only teachers having textbooks

FGD participants were asked if there were times during the 2009 school year when a class teacher was the only

one with a textbook. Most FGDs responded ‘no’ to the above question. For mathematics, two out of 13 primary

school and one out of 13 secondary school FGDs indicated that only the teacher had a textbook. For English, one out

of 13 primary school and three out of 13 secondary school FGDs indicated that only the teacher had a textbook. For

science, two out of 13 primary school and four out of 13 secondary school FGDs indicated that only the teacher had a

textbook.

47

CHAPTER 4



4.4.1 Introduction

In this section, the Survey’s results on the condition and durability of textbooks are discussed.

4.4.2 Condition of textbooks

The majority of the learners felt that their textbooks were in good condition, while some learners said they were in

poor condition, and a few felt that the textbooks were in fair condition. Mathematics textbooks were regarded as

being in good condition by most FGD participants, followed by fair and poor condition. Both English and science

textbooks books were mostly regarded as in good condition followed by poor and then fair condition.

Most of the learners in FGDs in secondary and primary schools felt that they always took good care of their text-

books, followed by some who felt that they sometimes took good care of their textbooks, and only a few who felt

that they never took care of their textbooks.

4.4.3 Durability of textbooks

One quarter of the KIs at the school level indicated that textbooks generally lasted for more than three years, but

less than five years; while another quarter felt that textbooks generally lasts for more than 4 years but less than 5

years.. One sixth of the respondents indicated that textbooks generally lasted for more than five years. Only five

percent of the respondents felt that textbooks lasted for less than one year. Please see details in Table 17.

Table 17: Durability of textbooks

Durability of Textbooks Number of Responses at

the School level

Less than 1 year 7

More than 1 but less than 2 years 16




More than 5 years 23

Total 129

More than two-thirds of the FGDs at school level were not happy with the durability of textbooks. They felt that

the binding of most textbooks was inferior and that covers of textbooks were not strong enough. KIs acknowl-

edged that learners tend not to handle textbooks well, but also emphasized that some textbooks did not last

because of poor binding and inferior materials used for textbook covers.

4.4 Condition and Durability of Textbooks

48

CHAPTER 4



Almost all of the FGDs at school level felt that the size of textbooks was fine. Very few FGDs felt that sometimes

the fonts were too small or too big. Only four participants indicated that some of the textbooks, such as some

mathematic textbooks, were too large. Almost all of the respondents were happy with the printing of textbooks.

4.4.4 Handling of textbooks by learners

Those FGD participants who felt that they took good care of their textbooks, reported doing the following:

Put protective covers on textbooks.

Washed hands before handling textbooks.

Put textbooks on desks while reading.

Stored textbooks in school bags or cupboards when not in use.

Did not eat or drink while handling textbooks.

However, they also felt that a few learners damaged textbooks by doing the following:

Writing in textbooks with pens.

Highlighting important phrases in books with highlighters.

Leaving textbooks in the rain.

Eating with textbooks in front of them.

Not covering textbooks with plastic or some other protective material.

Turning pages in such a manner that the page corners curled.

Those who receive books in a poor state had no desire to take care of the books, mainly because of the state of the

textbooks. FGD participants also indicated the following reasons for not caring for textbooks:

Not caring about education.

Carrying textbooks in unsuitable bags. Some learners could not afford suitable school bags. Many learners

carried their books in plastic bags, especially in rural areas.

Not liking used books, and caring only for books that are new.

If the learner did not like a certain subject then the learner was less likely to take care of the textbooks.

If the learner did not like the teacher then the learner was less likely to take care of textbooks.

Teachers did not encourage learners to take care of textbooks.

Some did not know how to take care of textbooks.

Parents did not have money to provide protective covers for the books.

Some learners were not supported by their parents.

49

CHAPTER 4



4.4.5 Strategies at school level to keep textbooks in good condition

Schools have an inventory/stock/delivery register for recording textbooks received, losses of textbooks, and text-

books written off or discarded for other reasons. The books are then provided with numbers (serial numbers) and

stamped before they are distributed to the teachers and learners.

An issue register is used to record textbooks issued to learners and teachers, including at least the date of issue, the

name of learner or teacher and an indication whether the textbook was returned (normally the date of return).

Each textbook is allocated a serial number. The learner’s name is recorded next to the serial number of the book

received. At the end of each year the learner is responsible for returning textbooks with the corresponding serial

numbers. Teachers record the textbooks returned as well as the condition of the textbooks. There is a textbook

control form or a control stamp in the front of the textbook where the serial number, the learner’s name, date of

issue to the learner, and date of return are recorded. This information is also recorded on a separate form by

teachers.

School level interviewees were asked what measures were in place to ensure that learners took good care of

textbooks. Their responses were as follows:

Learners indicated that they:

Memorized the serial number of the textbook to prevent other learners from stealing it.

Covered textbooks with protective material such as plastic, brown paper, or newspaper.

Stored textbooks in safe cupboards in classrooms.

Used textbooks only when needed.

Used suitable school bags to carry textbooks.

Kept textbooks out of the rain.

Did not use textbooks around the fire.

Did not use textbooks outside the house for fear that goats might eat pages (rural areas).

Washed hands before handling textbooks.

Did not eat while handling textbooks.

Did not use ink pens when writing in textbooks.

Erased all pencil marks in the textbooks before returning them at the end of the year.

Did not allow younger siblings to play with the textbooks.

Teachers and principals indicated that they:

Encouraged learners to cover their textbooks with protective material.

Confiscated textbooks from learners who had not covered the textbooks, until such time that the learners were

ready to cover their textbooks.

Took textbooks from learners who did not cover the books and gave them to other learners who would cover

the textbooks.

Did not allow learners to take textbooks home, especially in lower primary classes.

50

CHAPTER 4



Covered textbooks with protective material before handing them to learners, especially in lower primary

classes.

Instructed learners not write in their textbooks.

Encouraged learners to leave their textbooks in classrooms, especially over the weekends.

Encouraged learners to take good care of their textbooks.

Inspected textbooks regularly.

Disciplined learners if they damaged their textbooks.

Informed learners and parents that they would have to replace a lost or stolen textbook.

Withheld testimonials from learners in grade 12 if they had not returned all their textbooks.

Did not admit learners to the next grade until they returned their textbooks.

Problems with Return of Textbooks at the End of the School Year

Teachers who did not allow their learners to take textbooks home did not experience problems with the return of

the books. However, where learners were permitted to take books home the following problems were experienced

at the end of the school year:

Some textbooks had been lost.

Some textbooks had been stolen. Those who stole textbooks would erase the serial number or tear out the front

page of the textbook so that the book could not be linked to a specific learner.

Those sharing textbooks usually blamed each other for losing books.

Learners who were not returning to the same school the following year were more likely not to return their

books.

Causes of damaged textbooks

The main cause of damaged textbooks, according to primary and secondary school FGD participants, was poor

handling of textbooks by learners. This was followed by natural causes, such as rain. Third was poor quality of

textbooks. The same trend was noted by primary and secondary school FGDs, except that natural causes was more

frequently mentioned by primary than by secondary school learners. Teachers were asked the same question.

They indicated that most of the textbooks were damaged by poor handling (109 responses out of 261) by learners.

This was followed by natural causes (65 out of 261 responses), poor quality books (50 out of 261) and learners losing

textbooks (37 out of 261 responses).

Other causes that were highlighted by learners were the sharing of textbooks. FGD participants indicated that it

was difficult for some learners to take responsibility of textbooks that were shared, especially if a shared textbook

was only recorded in the name of one learner. The learner with the serial number had the responsibility of caring

for a shared book, but did not have the possibility to ensure that his/her partners took care of the book.

Learners in rural areas who stayed in thatched-roof houses complained that their textbooks were damaged by rain,

because rain usually leaked through the roof. They also complained that textbooks were damaged by mice, which

ate the pages of the textbooks during night. Some learners in rural areas would study under trees and sometimes

leave their books unattended, resulting in goats eating their textbooks. Some learners who did not have electricity

51

CHAPTER 4



(common in most rural areas) studied next to fires for illumination. This sometimes resulted in textbooks being

burnt by accident.

Most of the KIs at school level felt that textbooks were damaged, lost or written off prematurely because of poor

handling by learners, followed by natural causes (rain, floods, rodents, and fire), poor quality of books and learners

losing books.

Writing-off textbooks

Half of the regional interviewees indicated that they were very well informed about the procedures for writing off

textbooks in schools. Only one regional interviewee indicated not being informed at all about the procedure for

writing off textbooks. At the circuit level, one third of the interviewees reported not being informed at all, while

only seven out of 37 claimed to be well informed. At the school level close to three quarters of the interviewees

indicated that they were not at all informed about the procedures for writing off textbooks. One out of ten indi-

cated that they were not well informed, while more than one out of ten indicated that they were either very well

informed, reasonably well informed, or well informed about the procedure. They also indicated that the textbook

policy was not very clear on writing off textbooks. The prevailing procedure seems not to have been adequately

conveyed to inspectors, and even less well to schools.

At the school level, even teachers who indicated that they were informed or well informed about the procedure for

writing off textbooks, could not informatively speak about the process. One just said that they used their own

knowledge and skills to write off textbooks. They did write books off when the following happened:

Missing pages in textbooks.

Too many notes or marks in ink in the textbooks.

Not matching the syllabus or when the syllabus changed.

Front cover torn off or not in “good” condition.

Damaged beyond repair.

More than five years old (“outdated”).

Most of the schools indicated that they did not know what to do with textbooks which were no longer in use. A

limited number of schools indicated that inspectors and the regional procurement officers were informed about

books that were written off. These officers would usually visit the school in order to approve the books to be

written off. Most indicated that textbooks no longer in use were:

Kept in storage at school;

Kept in boxes in a separate classroom;

Sent to rural schools to support those schools or to provide them with reference books;

Placed in the library if the textbooks were still in good condition albeit out of date;

Distributed to learners as reference materials;

Kept in classrooms as reference material; and

Kept in various regional and national government storerooms.

52

CHAPTER 4



A limited number of schools indicated that regional officers came to schools to collect written-off textbooks.

Teachers were not sure what happened to these textbooks after they were picked up by regional officers, but

assumed that the textbooks were “burnt”.

Identified weaknesses in the process of writing off textbooks included the need to continue using even damaged

textbooks in schools that did not have enough textbooks; and the fact that written off textbooks took up a lot of

space in storage facilities. Strengths in the process included the freeing up of space in storerooms, while the man-

agement of ordering textbooks could be improved with fewer old textbooks in storerooms.

4.5.1 Introduction

This section of the report deals with the content of textbooks as it relates to the extent to which textbooks cover

the syllabi and curricula; comprehension of textbooks by learners; and helpfulness of textbooks.

4.5.2 Content of textbooks

All but three of the regional interviewees indicated that all textbooks covered the respective syllabus well. One

third (10 out of 30) of the circuit inspectors who responded to this question indicated that all textbooks covered the

syllabus well. However, eight out of 30 circuit inspectors who responded to this question were of the opinion that

none of the textbooks covered the syllabus well. At the school level, 54 out of 132 indicated that only some text-

books covered the syllabus well; while 43 felt that all textbooks covered the syllabus well and 21 felt that half of the

textbooks covered the syllabus well. Please find more details in Table 18.

Table 18: Does the content of textbooks cover the syllabi?


Response


All textbooks cover the syllabus well 9 10 43

Half of the textbooks cover the syllabus well 1 2 21

Only some textbooks cover the syllabus well 0 3 54

None of the textbooks cover the syllabus well 1 3 6

I am familiar with the subject, but don’t know the

answer or am not sure 1 8 3

I am not familiar with the subject 0 4 5

Total 12 30 132

4.5 Content of Textbooks

53

CHAPTER 4



One circuit inspector indicated that he had been in the education system for four decades and never found a

textbook that covered a syllabus well. The author of textbooks is usually good in certain aspects of a subject, but

not in all aspects, therefore textbooks usually cover only portions of syllabi. He further indicated that this was the

reason why many teachers used more than one textbook for a particular subject. Another inspector indicated that

textbooks are only supposed to target the basic competencies of learners, and that teachers need to make use of

supporting material to compensate where the textbooks fall short. The proposed textbooks were supposed to cover

the overall objectives of the syllabi but not every single aspect. This was why teacher support materials, readers,

and other documentation and materials needed to be used in the classroom. Just more than half of the respondents

were happy with the content of the textbooks, while just under half of the respondents were not. The following

reasons were given for textbooks not fully covering the syllabi:

Sometimes the syllabus changed but no new textbooks were provided.

It should not be expected that one textbook would cover a syllabus in its entirety. Support materials and other

textbooks were needed to complement the main textbook.

Old and outdated textbooks had more information than new textbooks.

4.5.3 Comprehension of textbook content

Only FGD participants in secondary schools were asked if they comprehended what they read in textbooks without

support from teachers, or whether they usually needed explanation from teachers to understand textbook content.

Half of the FGD participants in secondary schools indicated that they only sometimes understood the content of

textbooks without explanation by teachers. Only one and a half FGDs indicated that they always understood the

textbooks without explanation from teachers, while about five FGDs indicated that they never comprehended the

textbook content without support from the teacher.

4.5.4 Helpfulness of textbook content

Some FGD participants in primary schools indicated that the textbooks were not as helpful as they should be for

the main reason that many learners could not take textbooks home or that they had to share textbooks with other

learners. They further indicated that the textbooks would be more helpful in contributing to their understanding

of what their teachers told them in class if they had sufficient opportunity to use the textbooks.

However, most secondary school FGD participants felt that the content of the textbooks was either helpful or very

helpful. None felt that the content of the textbook was not helpful at all, while only a few FGDs indicated that it

was only a little bit helpful. Please see Table 19 for details.

Table 19: Helpfulness of textbooks: responses of the FGDs

Mathematics Textbooks English Textbooks Science Textbooks

Positive

responses

Negative

responses

Positive re-

sponses

Negative

responses

Positive re-

sponses

Negative

responses

All answers

are in the

textbooks

Many

examples

Examples are

Examples

not clear

Textbook is

not helpful

at all; even

the teacher

The

language is

easy to

understand

There are

exercises

Textbooks

are just full

of questions

with no

examples

Things that

Straight-

forward

information

Teacher uses

the same

textbook

Some

terminology

is difficult to

understand

in English

54

CHAPTER 4



Mathematics Textbooks English Textbooks Science Textbooks

in simple

terms

There are

formulas in

the text-

books that

are very

helpful

There are

exercises and

questions to

test oneself

If one does

not under-

stand

something in

class then

the text-

books

contribute to

better under-

standing

uses a

different

textbook

from the one

we have

and

questions

that one can

use to test

oneself after

each lesson

are in the

textbooks

are not the

same as in

our tests

which makes

it easy to

understand

Has pictures

that can be

used to

better

understand

things

4.6.1 Introduction

This section of the report deals with storage of textbooks and shelving in textbook storerooms.

Availability of storerooms

More than one third (59 out of 164) of schools that responded to this question made use of separate storerooms for

purposes of storing textbooks. One fifth of the schools made use of storerooms intended for other purposes, such

as storing equipment or office records. Another fifth had no storeroom at all, in which case textbooks were stored

in various classrooms. One tenth of the schools made use of the principal’s office, while two schools used the staff

room and one school used the hallway. Under ‘other’ in the table below, one school used the library, one school

used the principal’s house; one school made use of the school’s toilet/bathroom; while other schools claimed not to

have books to store. The data are given in Table 20 overleaf.

4.6 Storage of Textbooks at Schools

55

CHAPTER 4



Table 20: Types of storage facilities at schools

Type of Storage Facilities at Schools Number of schools

having the facility

Separate storeroom(s) 59

Storeroom(s) mainly intended for other purposes, for example for

storing equipment, office records, etc. 33

Principal’s office 20

Staff room (tea room) 3

Hallway 1

No storeroom; textbooks are stored in various classrooms 35

Other (principal’s house, school bathroom, school toilet, no books to

store) 12

Library 1

KIs were asked about the adequacy of their storerooms. Only 119 KIs responded to this question, as the remainder

had indicated that they did not have proper storerooms. Forty-seven of the 119 schools which responded to this

question indicated that the storage facilities were adequate for storing textbooks. However, just over half of the

respondents were not satisfied with the facilities, stating that they were either inadequate or very inadequate.

Please see Table 21 for more details.

Table 21: Adequacy of storage facilities at schools

Adequacy of Storage Facilities at Schools Number of

schools

Very inadequate (there is no storage space, or less than one third of the

storage space required) 39

Inadequate (between one third and two thirds of the space required) 22

Reasonably adequate (sufficient for two-thirds or more of the books which

need to be stored, but not for all) 11

Adequate (sufficient for all books which must be stored) 47

Total 119

Two-thirds of the respondents indicated that all textbooks for all grades were stored in the same rooms. Almost all

of the storerooms had shelves for storing textbooks. Almost all storerooms were reported to be locked at all times,

while almost all storerooms were locked at the time of observation. Almost all storerooms which were not locked

56

CHAPTER 4



at the time of observation, had locks on the doors. Almost all of the schools had glass/wooden windows. About

10% of the window panes were, however, broken. Most of the storerooms were protected from rain, floods, ro-

dents, and theft while just over two thirds were protected from fire.

Storeroom size and shelving

Of the 59 schools which indicated that they had separate storerooms for textbooks, measurements were taken at

58. Of these 58, most of the storerooms were between 16 and 20 square meters in size. This was followed by

storerooms between 6 and 10 square meters and 21 to 25 square meters. Two of the schools had storerooms be-

tween 51 and 70 square meters while only two schools had storerooms smaller than six square meters. Please see

Table 22 for details.

Table 22: Size of storerooms

Size Number of

storerooms

1 – 5 square meters 2






31 - 40 square meters 5




71+ square meters 0

Total 58

All storerooms had shelves in the rooms. The sizes of shelves varied from 3 shelf meters to over a 100 shelf meters.

Overall shelf space did not seem to be a problem where storage facilities were available, although some schools did

store textbooks on the floor. Shelf space was more of a problem in schools that did not have storerooms and used

the principal’s office, staff rooms or other spaces. Please see Table 23 for more details.

57

CHAPTER 4



Table 23: Number of schools in different ranges of total book storage shelf meters

Size

(shelf meters)

Number of

Schools

1 – 5 10

6 – 10 8

11 – 15 1

16 – 20 6

21 – 25 8

26 – 30 1

31 - 40 6

41 – 50 4

51 – 60 5

61 – 70 3

71 6

Total 58

58

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


5 Recommendations

A number of aspects of the provision of textbooks requiring improvement have been mentioned in the preceding

sections of this report. This section contains recommendations for improving the situation, based on the responses

of the key Informants, and on the Consultant’s own observations.

5.1.1 Implementation of the textbook policy

Key Informants stressed repeatedly, especially at the national level, that the textbook policy was in place, and that

it was good in general. This statement was made in particular in respect of the ordering and delivery process. The

problem, according to the respondents, lay in the implementation, or lack of implementation, thereof. The most

important recommendation, therefore, is to have the textbook policy implemented and followed by all concerned.

While the implementation of the policy is the responsibility of the respective institutions of the MoE, i.e. schools,

circuits and regional offices, the SCMU should be tasked with monitoring the process and making sure that it is

well managed.

If not done already, the recordkeeping at the circuit and regional offices must allow pinpointing where and why

delays occurred, or substantial mistakes were made. Follow-up by the next higher level in the hierarchy should

resolve immediate problems, while an overall analysis by the SCMU of the problems experienced will allow adjust-

ing the relevant policies and procedures. The weak points will not necessarily be directly linked to the textbook

policy, but could have other reasons, such as poor communication channels, excessive workloads, or poor perform-

ance, etc.

Monitoring the implementation of the textbook policy should not only be limited to monitoring the Ministry’s

performance, but also the performance of the distributors. A comparison between orders placed and deliveries

made would show up any inefficiencies in respect of correct and timely execution of the orders. It will suffice to

analyze a representative random sample of orders to determine whether or not a comprehensive investigation is

required.

A key aspect of the implementation of the policy is that all parties involved must adhere to the annual program,

from which the critical path has been outlined in the “Illustrative Gantt Chart of the Critical Path in the Annual

Textbook Procurement Process” on page 30.

Implementing the policy requires an awareness campaign and appropriate training in the relevant procedures at

the circuit and school levels, where substantially more than half of the respondents stated that they were not very

well informed about the process of, and procedures for, ordering textbooks for schools. A cascade approach is

recommended where, for example, circuit inspectors would be trained to train school staff in their circuit. Utilizing

cluster school heads should be considered. The training should, amongst other things, include the following:

5.1 General

59

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


the ordering process:

determining school-level textbook budgets (circuit and higher levels), or introduction to the budget and

consequences of exceeding the budget (school level);

ordering textbooks at the school level (selecting books from the catalog, advantages and disadvantages of

switching to different textbooks, needs assessment, prioritizing, and other considerations for staying

within the allocated budget);

communication between the different levels (schools, circuits, regions, head office);

procedures for receiving books, including the following aspects:

understanding delivery notes and verifying and certifying them;

receiving books after school hours;

recordkeeping:

book inventory;

keeping an issue register;

maintenance of books:

measures for keeping books in good condition;

repairing books;

write-off procedures.

It is also necessary to provide management training to equip managers at circuit and regional levels, who are

involved in the process, with the necessary skills for successfully implementing the policy.

Consideration should be given to establishing a task force which will support the SCMU in the initial training and

monitoring.

5.1.2 Textbook provision

The MoE Textbook Policy (March 2008) states: “The overall objective of the policy is to ultimately achieve a text-

book to learner ratio of 1:1 for core subjects in the first instance.” While present initiatives may assist the MoE to

achieve this level, the ratio can only be sustained if the necessary resources can be made available annually on the

MoE budget. Keeping the costs of textbook provision reasonably low, and/or providing additional resources, would

contribute towards reaching the goal of a 1:1 ratio.

Managing the costs

The costs of providing adequate numbers of textbooks can be reduced in several ways:

maintenance of books (looking after the books and prolonging their life span);

schools limiting the switching between different textbooks (see also “Switching between book series” under

5.4);

least overall costs (one book covering syllabus, good textbooks contribute towards lower repetition rates and

better outcomes of the education system, costs of switching books – problems of phased switching in a grade,

life time of books – syllabus changes, quality of binding);

60

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


aim at using books for a minimum of 6 years;

ensure that a competitive market exists, keeping in mind that the Namibian situation requires publishing and

printing textbooks in relatively small numbers, compared to most other countries.

Efficiency and time management

It is mentioned under 4.2.2 that the announcement of the budget and release of funds by the Ministry of Finance

were the most critical dates in the annual ordering process of textbooks. These dates leave little time for the other

steps in the ordering process. Adhering to the current schedule requires withdrawing human resources from their

primary functions, such as teaching or administrative functions, for some time. It can be assumed that the limited

time available also results in a higher investment in infrastructure, especially for the distributors. There are costs

linked to strongly limiting the time allowed for the different steps in the ordering process. For example, teachers

neglect their teaching when they have to compile their book orders; and distributors have to invest in more infra-

structure (vehicles, staff, etc.) to deliver within a short period of time.

The time available for the ordering and delivery process of textbooks could be extended by about a month if it were

known earlier what funds would be available for purchasing textbooks, and if it were not necessary to wait for the

release of these funds. This could be achieved by creating a Textbook Fund with the assistance of the MCA-N and

other donor funded projects. Once established, the fund would have to be replenished annually by the Ministry of

Finance annually.

The ordering process could also start earlier in the year if the textbook catalog were completed late in the previous

year, which is possible.

The value of establishing a Textbook Fund may be doubted, considering the annual program. It is recommended

that the advantages and the feasibility of establishing a Textbook Fund as described above be investigated, with

the aim of avoiding the annual financial cycle causing textbooks to be delivered to schools too late. If the outcomes

of the investigations are positive, it is recommended to establish such a fund.

Budget priorities

The government could increase its budget allocation to education to contribute to the goal of adequate textbook

provision. This is a matter of national priorities – increasing the education budget will be to the detriment of other

sectors, or require increasing taxes.

Considering the major items on the budget, it is evident that the MoE basically has to weigh up textbook provision

against learner-to-teacher ratios. Other budget lines normally leave only little scope for decreasing them. If fewer

teachers have to be paid, more textbooks can be purchased, but this would result in increased class sizes. It is

recommended to review both ratios, the learner-to-textbook ratios and the learner-to-teacher ratios, to determine

the best compromise within the budgetary limitations. Important considerations have to be weighed up in this

respect:

learners sharing textbooks has a detrimental effect on learning, especially in respect of studying at home, doing

homework, and studying when teachers are absent;

excessive class sizes have a negative influence on teaching and learning.

61

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


A number of recommendations were made in the key Informant interviews concerning the textbook catalog,

which is compiled and produced by NIED:

The choices of alternative books should be limited to about three titles;

Redundant entries must be removed from the catalog;

The distinction between learner and teacher materials must be clear – they should preferably be kept apart;

Ensure that all ISBN, titles and authors are entered correctly and completely;

Publishers must be held responsible for verifying their entries;

The catalog should be laid out in a way which contributes towards avoiding transcription errors when schools

compile their requisitions;

Only books which can be delivered may be entered in the catalog.

Based on these contributions and on the Consultant’s own observations, the following recommendations are

made:

1. Contents of the catalog:

1.1 The role of the catalog must be clear: Is it only intended for ordering textbooks, or does it also inform

schools about which textbooks are (still) suitable for use, i.e. which textbooks are adequately cover-

ing the syllabus, although they should no longer be ordered.

1.2 The textbook evaluation committees should review the catalog, generally limiting to three the num-

ber of alternative textbooks for a subject in a grade. A greater choice should only be allowed if there

are sound reasons for doing this. The following considerations should guide the selection of titles:

a. compliance with and coverage of the syllabus (this is essential, as schools will rely on it when

selecting textbooks from the catalog);

b. pedagogical value;

c. appropriate language level for the targeted learners;

d. suitability for learners studying on their own (e.g. when teachers are absent);

e. physical durability of the book

f. price;

g. promoting a competitive free market;

1.3 The textbook evaluation committees should identify books to be removed from the catalog;

1.4 The catalog should clearly indicate which books can still be used, but should no longer be ordered;

1.5 All prices stated in the catalog must include value added tax (VAT);

5.2 Textbook catalog

62

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


1.6 Care must be taken to include essential book revision information in the titles or, preferably, in a

separate column for notes.

2. Layout of the catalog:

2.1 Attention must be given to a clear, easily readable layout of the catalog;

2.2 No teacher materials or titles/materials which are to be ordered in smaller quantities than one per

learner should be listed under learner materials (it was not always clear to teachers and principals,

which titles should be ordered for each learner);

2.3 The quantities recommended for ordering should be reviewed annually.

3. Compilation of the catalog:

It was observed that some titles appear under different headings in the catalog; for example, when books

are used for different subjects. It was also noticed that several book entries were duplicated, although the

exact wording of the title differed. The duplications proved to be very problematic in the entry of the Text-

book Control Forms, and they will cause confusion in the ordering process.

To avoid problems such as these, it is recommended to convert the catalog from the present spreadsheet

(Excel) format to a database. This will have the following advantages:

each title will only be stored once in the database, while it can still be listed in as many places as neces-

sary, reliably using the same reference number in each place, thus reducing the possibility of mixing up

titles during the processing of orders;

additional information pertaining to book titles, which might not be included in the catalog, but which

would be of value in maintaining the catalog or for the information of specialists, could be stored in the

database;

different printouts of the catalog information can readily be provided for different users, such as the

textbook evaluation committees and publishers. The publishers could be provided with individualized

lists of books for verifying their entries, thus reducing the chance of them overlooking some errors;

the maintenance of the catalog will be simplified.

The first bullet, storing each title only once, has the significant advantage of having to enter and update the

entry only in a single record, and it will appear in exactly the same way wherever it is used in the catalog.

This will drastically reduce the confusion experienced when the Textbook Control Forms were entered.

4. Teachers selecting titles from the catalog:

Recommendations pertaining to the selection of books from the catalog to order them have been made un-

der the heading “Selecting titles from the catalog” in 5.4.

63

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


It is recommended to develop a database system for keeping track of textbook stock levels at the school level. The

issue of books to learners can be handled internally by schools. The possible advantages of keeping track of indi-

vidual books would not warrant the effort and costs of maintaining the data. The database should be maintained

at the regional level, continuously updating textbook stock data. This database would serve as an important

textbook management tool in respect of the following:

maintaining an easily accessible stock register of all textbooks and other learning support materials (LSM);

forming the basis of a good textbook stock control system;

managing the provision of textbooks;

assessing the level of book provision at any time and observing trends, thus supporting budget planning;

analyzing the life span of textbooks and identifying points of excessive losses, which could pertain to specific

schools or to particular types of textbooks, which do not last long;

provide access to reliable textbook data to other users, such as the EMIS.

The database system should include:

a baseline of LSM provision, which should be verified by physical counts at regular intervals;

current LSM numbers calculated on the basis of the baseline and updated according to:

requisitions,

orders,

confirmed deliveries,

reported write-offs,

reported losses.

The requisition and order data would indicate needs and expected acquisitions, but not actual changes in stock

numbers – these would be adjusted according to the deliveries, write-offs and losses.

Linked to the book catalog database, this database would allow distinguishing between materials which could

still be used, and those which should not.

It will be essential to compare the numbers of book titles in the database to the actual stock numbers at regular

intervals.

Maintaining the LSM (or textbook) database should be a stock control function, as LSM are stock items. It could be

considered to utilize the EMIS data typists for entering LSM data during those times of the year, when they are not

busy entering EMIS data. The EMIS should also provide advice in respect of data collection procedures, and it should

be involved during the design of the LSM database.

It was suggested in the Textbook Policy that “the monitoring and evaluation of the supply chain and textbook

provision and use will form part of the overall ETSIP monitoring and evaluation system integrated into EMIS.” The

EMIS should, though, not be expected to collect the relevant data, or to manage the data entry process. Those are

stock control functions. The EMIS has essentially a management support function, which is closely integrated with

educational planning. It requires access to the LSM data, but it should not be tasked with stock control and ordering

functions.

5.3 Inventory

64

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


While all regional KIs indicated that they were very well informed about the ordering process, only half of the

circuit inspectors were, while less than one third of the school-level KI were very well informed.

The majority of regional and circuit level KI claimed that regional offices did not change school textbook orders, or

that schools were at least consulted. Half of the school-level KI claimed that the orders were changed, the majority

of them stating that the schools were not consulted.

Several problems regarding the delivery of textbooks to schools and the verification of the consignments were

mentioned. Deliveries after school hours were criticized by several KIs. Incorrect deliveries were frequently re-

ported by schools, while the distributors stated that cuts to the orders at circuit or higher levels, made without

informing schools, could have created this perception. Schools reportedly also had difficulties in understanding the

concept of “back orders.”

Recommendations made by KIs in respect of the ordering process have been listed under 4.1. A number of impor-

tant recommendations have been selected and discussed in more detail below together with the Consultants’ own

recommendations.

Annual program:

The annual textbook ordering follows a time-critical schedule, which requires all involved to adhere to the

specified dates. Any delays will negatively affect all subsequent steps.

It is recommended that the SCMU annually draws up a program with fixed dates, based on the Gantt chart on

page 320 for distribution to all schools, circuit inspectors, regional offices, head office components involved in

the process, such as NIED and the procurement section, and the publishers and distributors of textbooks. The

importance of adhering to the program should be explained and stressed.

Selecting titles from the catalog:

The ordering procedures are generally good, but they have not been fully implemented. Rigorously implement-

ing the policy thus remains our most important recommendation.

Several recommendations can be made on the basis of the findings of the study, and on background knowledge

of the Consultants:

Book presentations or exhibitions by publishers, as well as school visits by publishers’ agents allow schools to

view different books. Small schools in ‘isolated’ locations may be excluded from this process. This way of in-

forming teachers bears, though, the risk of strongly biased information or even undesired influencing.

Professional staff of the Ministry of Education could also introduce schools to different available materials.

However, care should be taken to avoid staff with vested interests, e.g., authors of textbooks, being involved in

the process.

In selecting books, schools should be able to assume confidently that any book in the catalog adequately covers

the syllabus.

5.4 Ordering of textbooks

65

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


The best option seems to be for the Ministry to organize and supervise book exhibitions, inviting all publishers.

Wherever possible, professional staff with no vested interests should be present at these presentations to see to

it that the different products are presented in a professional manner without unduly influencing teachers and

principals. The Ministry should also consider providing transport to those teachers and principals who could

otherwise not attend these exhibitions.

Considering the total costs of textbooks and their importance to education, the investment of resources and

staff working time by the Ministry should be justified.

Compliance with the budget:

All schools must be informed about their textbook budget allocation before they start ordering books.

All levels, i.e. schools, circuits, regions, and the national level, must ensure that the book orders are within their

respective budgetary limits, as the next higher level would otherwise be forced to cut the orders. Due to time

constraints and limited means of communication, these cuts would often have to be made without consulta-

tion. Circuit inspectors in particular should, though, make every reasonable effort to call the affected school

principals to discuss the cuts with them.

It is essential that the lower levels, especially the schools, are informed about any changes made to their orders.

The schools must know what they can expect to be delivered for them to verify that orders have been fully exe-

cuted. This implies that schools must receive copies of their orders as finally placed with the distributors.

Switching between book series:

Switching from one book series to another one may be desirable for schools when better options become avail-

able. This can, though, be a costly exercise if it requires replacing part of the school’s book stock. The following

guidelines are recommended for keeping the costs of switching low:

switching to a new book series should only be considered if there are clear advantages;

avoid switching in several subjects simultaneously;

start with the lowest grade in a phase and introduce the new series in higher grades in subsequent years;

the introduction of a new curriculum would be a good point in time for switching series, if this is neces-

sary, as new textbooks should be ordered in any case.

Delivery and receipt of book consignments:

The recommendation of some KIs to confine deliveries to school hours is not practical, as the distributors of

textbooks cannot be expected to confine their deliveries to only part of a day. Limiting delivery times to school

hours would inevitably increase delivery costs and extend the delivery period. It is therefore recommended

that schools make arrangements for receiving books throughout the day, at least during hours to be agreed on

between the Ministry and the distributors.

It is recommended that the Ministry agrees with the distributors on the hours of the day when textbooks can

be delivered to schools. All schools should be informed accordingly, and they will have to make the necessary

arrangements. The parties should also explore possibilities of informing schools of expected delivery times in

advance, although schools will have to be flexible in accommodating unexpected delays, such as delays at

other schools, and poor road conditions.

66

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


Upon delivery, all book parcels must be opened and checked before the delivery notes are signed. Checking in-

volves verifying the titles delivered and counting the books.

Shortcomings in the data entry system and the Textbook Control Forms were slowing down data entry and con-

tributed to inaccuracies in the entered data. The following measures are recommended to improve the system:

General considerations regarding the form design

The forms should be designed to provide adequate space for completely entering the required information. The

columns Textbook Title and ISBN on Textbook Control Form .03, for example, are too narrow.

Data entry errors can, to a considerable extent, be trapped at the time of data entry – while the data typist has

the form in his/her hand – if check totals are provided on the forms when these totals are entered: the data en-

try system will alert the data typist if the totals do not tally with the sum of the relevant numbers which have

been entered.

The information identifying a particular form should be entered at the top left of the form to facilitate search-

ing for a form; for example, when the original form has to be compared to the entered data. Even when the

forms of a school are stapled together, the codes at the top left allow browsing through a pile of forms by pick-

ing up the forms in the corner where they are stapled.

Our recommended Textbook Control Form .03, Inventory Register, has been attached as Annex G to demonstrate

these points:

The identifying information, i.e. Region, School code, Subject code and Grade, has been entered at the top left.

Adequate space has been provided for entering the ISBN and book title. In the majority of cases, 9 rows are

adequate for entering the LSM for a subject in a specific grade of a school. If not, a continuation page can be

used. Space has been provided on the form for indicating that another form was used.

The total number of books corresponds to the sum of new, fair, poor and write-off books. Space has been pro-

vided for entering the total. The total also corresponds to the stock in use plus the stock stored.

A total row has been inserted at the bottom of the table for inserting the vertical columns of each row.

When these totals are compared to the corresponding sums by the computer system, any incorrectly entered or

omitted data will be detected.

A drawback of the above-mentioned verification method is that an alarm may be raised because the school has

entered incorrect totals. To avoid data entry being held up by such ‘false alarms,’ totals should be checked before

the forms are entered in the database. This would still be much faster than the alternative method of entering the

complete forms twice in the database.

Consistency of the data entered on computer

Different methods of verifying the data entered in the database must be applied, depending on the particular data.

The verification of numbers, where the sums can be calculated and entered, has been discussed above.

5.5 Forms and data entry system

67

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


Codes, such as the region, school and subject codes, should only be accepted by the computer system if they are

valid, i.e. if a corresponding region, school or subject has been entered in the relevant table of codes. The meaning

of the code, i.e., the name of the school, region or subject, should be displayed on the computer screen immediately

after the code has been entered. This allows the data enterer to check whether the correct code was entered.

Errors in entering the enrolment in the subject may go undetected, as there is nothing on the form to verify the

enrolment against. The entry could still be checked by requiring an entry, i.e. not allowing the field to be skipped,

and by requiring the enrolment to be entered again before the system proceeds to the next form. If the second

entry differs from the first one, the computer system should raise the alarm and require the data enterer to enter

the correct enrolment twice.

Selecting book titles or other LSM from a fixed list of titles

Selecting the correct title from the data-entry system was tedious and prone to error in the Ministry’s data-entry

system used for entering the Textbook Control Form data. The system can be improved in the following manner,

which was used for capturing the 10% sample Survey data to the best possible extent. The list of books, which was

used for entering the Textbook Control Form data, also had to be used for entering the 10% sample Survey data to

ensure that the same identification numbers were used in both data sets. This did not allow implementing all

recommendations listed below.

The problems experienced during the Survey will be avoided to a large extent, if the textbook catalog is compiled

using a database system. When this is done, each unique title will be stored in one single record of the database, as

described under 5.2. In contrast, many titles were duplicated in the database used for entering the Textbook Con-

trol Forms. This forced the data enterers to choose arbitrarily between several entries seeming to be the same.

The data entry system should, amongst other things, meet the following requirements:

No book title (or LSM description) may be duplicated in the database.

The ISBN may only contain 13 (or 10) digits, and no dashes (-), slashes (/), spaces ( ) or other invalid characters,

such as the letter “O” instead of the digit “0” (zero.) The 10-digit ISBN can have a control character “X” in the last

position. As a general rule, the ISBN should have the correct control character in the last position. It cannot,

though, be ruled out that some books have been printed with an incorrect ISBN, in which case the incorrect

number must also be stored in the database.

We recommend to use a unique catalog identification number for book titles when entering book orders. This

will resolve the problem of different books, e.g. corresponding learner and teacher books, having the same ISBN.

The data entry system should allow the data enterer to enter any part of the ISBN or title to look up all corre-

sponding titles. This will allow looking up the 10-digit ISBN by entering the first nine digits, which normally

correspond to the 3rd to the 12th digit of the 13-digit equivalent. If also allows to search for titles when the

school recorded an incomplete title. As a rule, the search for a title should be confined to the subject for which a

book is being entered. The possibility of looking for a title among all subjects should also be provided.

In addition, the data entry system should not allow any entry to be duplicated. For example, if the combination of

school, subject and grade has already been entered together with the enrolment in the subject, it should be impos-

sible to enter the same school, subject and grade again with a different enrolment. It should also be impossible to

duplicate any LSM recorded for a specific combination of school, subject and grade – even with different stock

counts.

68

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


The above-mentioned measures will ensure that data-entry errors are reduced to a fraction of the errors which

occurred during the entry of the Textbook Control Forms of the Textbook Baseline Study.

Complete forms which have not been entered in the database can only be detected by verifying that all expected

forms have been entered. This is a relatively simple procedure for compulsory subjects, but becomes problematic

for grades 11 and 12 where there are subject choices. The same applies to languages other than English in all grades.

One method of detecting forms which have not been entered, is signing or ticking off the forms which have been

entered. A manual check would then show up forms which have not been entered. Alternatively, or in addition,

schools may be requested to complete a list of subjects they are offering in each grade.

Implementing the above-mentioned verification mechanisms will contribute significantly to faster and more

reliable data entry. What has been explained here for Textbook Control Form .03 applies in a similar way to Text-

book Control .01.

The features of the recommended database, which have been mentioned above, do not fully specify the database.

Complete specifications should be drawn up in consultation with representative users before the database can be

developed.

Despite the flaws in the Textbook Control Form .03 data described in this report, the data should be used as a basis

in developing a textbook stock record system. However, the data must be verified and, if required, updated during

the first complete stock count conducted by the MoE. This will allow the MoE to update only the counts of the book

titles which have been recorded correctly, instead of re-entering all information.

As mentioned under 5.6 above, it is recommended to use the Textbook Control Form .03 data collected in 2009 as a

first basis for a textbook stock record system. The data are, though, flawed to some extent and must be verified

before the stock record system can be considered to be reliable.

Before verifying the data, a database system meeting the requirements outlined under 5.5 above should be devel-

oped and thoroughly tested to ensure that the updated data can be recorded immediately.

It is recommended that the stock control offices of the MoE verify the textbook stock in all schools, involving as few

temporary staff as possible. This supposes that the MoE has hired the required staff for controlling textbooks as

stock items. The staff need to be trained for the verification of the textbook stock, as this differs considerably from

counting “tables and chairs”. Trained MoE stock control officers conducting the stock count will ensure that they

will gain the necessary experience in controlling textbook stock, which is a requirement for establishing a sustain-

able system.

5.6 Utilizing the Textbook Control Form .03 data as baseline data for an LSM database

5.7 Conducting a full Survey of schools

69

CHAPTER 5

Recommendations


The slow and incomplete return of the Textbook Control Forms can, to a large extent, be attributed to the forms

having been sent directly to schools, largely sidestepping the Ministry’s hierarchy. It is strongly recommended to

conduct future data collections through the regional and circuit offices, or at least with the approval and support of

these offices. A letter supporting the data collection must be obtained from the relevant MoE head office compo-

nent. For a major exercise, the letter should be signed by the Permanent Secretary.

The 10% Sample Survey was conducted towards the end of the school year and at a time when examinations were

being taken. Many schools voiced their dissatisfaction with the disruption caused during that critical time of the

school year. It must be assumed that the time constraints experienced during the KII were largely a result of the

Survey being conducted at this time.

It is strongly recommended not to conduct future Surveys during examination times or towards the end of the

school year.

5.8 Future data collection and Surveys

Annex A

Quantitative Data Collection Intruments

Annex A: Quantitative data collection instruments The Textbook Count Form and the Learner Count Forms are shown on the following three pages. The textbook counts were not aggregated by the data collectors, but were entered on computer per classgroup. The learners in each class were counted according to their gender and age. These numbers were aggregated to the grade level after transcribing them to the summary form. Transcription errors were avoided as far as possible by using the same column widths in the class level and summary forms, and by including totals, which would have raised an alert during data entry at the latest.

Textbook count form School code: ............... School: ................................................................................................................. Region: ........................................... Grade: ........................ Subject: ....................................................................... (............ ) Gd 11/12: Enrolment in subject: .................... Class: ........................ Teacher materials (Tick when teacher materials are recorded on the form. See guidelines.) Enrolment expected 2010: .............

Number of textbooks by condition and use Type of book (Tick one) Stock good Stock fair Stock poor Stock write off

Total stock

ISBN Title

1. T

extb

ook

2. L

SM

6

3. R

eade

r

4. W

orkb

ook7

5. A

tlas

6. R

efer

enc

e8

In u

se

Sto

red

To

tal

In u

se

Sto

red

To

tal

In u

se

Sto

red

To

tal

In u

se

Sto

red

To

tal

In u

se

Sto

red

Boo

ks n

ot

seen

To

tal

1 2 3 4 5 6

1

1 2 3 4 5 6

2

1 2 3 4 5 6

3

1 2 3 4 5 6

4

1 2 3 4 5 6

5

Total:

Condition of book: Good: New, one year old or undamaged Fair: Usable for a further 2 years Poor: In last year of service Write off: No longer usab

6 LSM: Learning Support Materials (only include printed materials and LSMs in the textbook catalogue) 7 Workbook: Printed book into which learners write, and which should only be used once. 8 Reference: Dictionary, Encyclopaedia, etc.

Note: No book may be counted more than once, e.g. readers used by different learners at different times in the year, must only be counted once!

H O

Grade: ............ School code: ............. School name: ............................................................................................. Region: ..............................

Males Age

Class 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 (+)

Total

A B C D E F G H I J K L

Total

Females Age

Class 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 (+)

Total

A B C D E F G H I J K L

Total

Nu

mb

er o

f le

arn

ers

by

age

and

sex

– C

lass

-lev

el f

orm

School code: ............. School name: ............................................................................................ Region: ...........................................................

Males Age

Grade 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 (+)

Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Total

Females Age

Grade 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 (+)

Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Total

Nu

mb

er o

f le

arn

ers

by

age

and

sex

– S

um

mar

y fo

rm

Annex B

Key Informant Interview Instrument

Annex B: Key Informant Interview Instrument

VERSION 2 ‐ 07/10/2009

Textbook Procurement Baseline Survey

Key Informant Interview Guide

Regional, Circuit and School Levels Prepared by GOPA/SIAPAC for MOE and MCA

Information Contact Details

Name of Region

First Name of Interviewee

Surname of Interviewee

Title (Mr., Mrs., Ms., Dr., Rev., etc.)

Position

Name of

Organisation/Department/School

Contact details Phone:

Email:

Level

____ ‐ 1 National

____ ‐ 2 Regional

____ ‐ 3 Circuit

____ ‐ 4 School

Date and Time

Date: Time:

Co‐operation

______ ‐ 1 high ______ ‐ 2 medium ______ ‐ 3 low

High: Responded willingly and frankly to the questions. Contributed openly and meaningfully to the topic.

Medium: Responded half-heartedly to reasonably well to the questions (perhaps somewhat reluctantly) and offered hardly any contributions of his/her own.

Low: Reluctant to respond openly. Offered (next to) no contributions other than direct answers to the questions.

[Explain that we, SIAPAC, have been contracted by Ministry of Education to carry out a Baseline Textbook Survey. The overall aim of the Textbook Procurement Baseline Study is to improve learners’ access to textbooks and improve the management and utilisation of textbooks within primary and secondary schools. The Ministry of Education (MOE) commissioned this study to “collect detailed information on textbooks across schools in Namibia to find out the exact level of textbooks presence for each Namibian school for English, Maths and Science.]

[Explain that their comments are confidential, and that we will not be attributing their comments by name or position.]

Introductory Question

1) [Ask all] As a first question, would you please tell me about the main

activities/responsibilities of your organisation and of your position as it relates to the

procurement, distribution and/or utilisation of textbooks?

Textbook Catalogue

2) Some general questions regarding the Textbook Catalogue of the Ministry of Education:

1. Are you using the catalog in one way or another?

2. For which purpose? – For ordering books for your school, in any capacity fulfilling

a role between the school and the supplier, as a supplier, or for another purpose

(please specify?)

3. From your point of view, can you mention specific good aspects of the present

catalog and/or aspects which should be improved? Please be specific in your

answer.

Procurement of Textbooks

3) How well have you been informed about the process and procedures of ordering textbooks

for schools? [Depending on the response below, please elaborate] ___ ‐ 1 very well

___ ‐ 2 well

___ ‐ 3 not well

___ ‐ 4 not at all

4) How are textbooks delivered to schools? [The respondent should briefly describe the process as he/she knows it, preferable starting from the supplier and ending at the school. There may be alternative ‘routes.’]

.................................................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................................................

5) What works well in the current textbook ordering process? [please elaborate on the following different levels]

a) School level ...................................................................................................................................

b) Circuit level ...................................................................................................................................

c) Regional level ...............................................................................................................................

d) National level ................................................................................................................................

e) Supplier level ................................................................................................................................

6) What does not work well in the current textbook ordering process? [please elaborate on the following different levels]

a) School level ...................................................................................................................................

b) Circuit level ...................................................................................................................................

c) Regional level ...............................................................................................................................

d) National level ................................................................................................................................

e) Supplier level ................................................................................................................................

7) Has the ordering process caused delays in delivery of textbooks? If yes, how often? [please elaborate based on response below, referring to the national, regional and school levels as applicable] ___ ‐ 1 very often [delays were experienced every year in past 5 years] ___ ‐ 2 often [delays were experienced only two or three times in past

5 years] ___ ‐ 3 not very often[delays were experienced never or only once in the

past 5 years]

_a) In cases where late deliveries were experienced, what were the main reason for the

late delivery?

_b) To what extent have late deliveries hampered the ability of teachers to teach?

8) What is in your opinion the effect of the present process of ordering books on the provision

of textbooks to schools? The number of books provided is …[The response to this question should describe a situation in general] ___ ‐ 1 very inadequate [more than 2 learners sharing a textbook] ___ ‐ 2 inadequate [2 learners sharing a textbook] ___ ‐ 3 adequate[most learners have textbooks] ___ ‐4‐ excessive [more than one tenth of the textbooks are not used] ___ ‐ 5 very excessive [more than 1 out of 5 textbooks are not used] ___ ‐ 6 differs widely for different textbooks, cannot be generalised

___ ‐ 7 respondent is not informed about the situation (the effect)

9) Do regional offices change book orders from schools with or without consultations with

schools?

___ ‐ 1 no

___ ‐ 2 yes, but consult with schools first

___ ‐ 3 yes, but without consulting the schools

10) Do individual schools have a budget, i.e., a fixed amount of funds (money), allocated to

them for ordering textbooks?

___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no

___ ‐ 3 don’t know

11) Taking everything that we have discussed about the ordering of textbooks into

consideration, how effective is the ordering process of textbooks from schools? [Effective in the sense that the schools actually get the books they need] [Depending on the response below, please elaborate] ___ ‐ 1 very effective

___ ‐ 2 somewhat effective

___ ‐ 3 effective

___ ‐ 4 somewhat ineffective

___ ‐ 5 not at all effective

12) How effective and efficient is the process of verifying that textbooks claimed by the

suppliers to have been delivered to schools, have actually arrived at the schools? [Effective means that the books claimed to have been delivered, have in fact reached the schools. – Efficient means that the level to which irregularities in this respect are prevented, justifies the effort required for verifying the delivery. (Complex and time-consuming processes, which still allow many irregularities to go on unnoticed, would be very inefficient.) Depending on the response below, please elaborate] ___ ‐ 1 very effective and very efficient

___ ‐ 2 effective and efficient

___ ‐ 3 very effective but not efficient

___ ‐ 4 not effective and not efficient

___ ‐ 5 very ineffective and very inefficient

13) What should be done to improve the delivery of textbooks?[please elaborate on improvement at the following different levels, where applicable]

_a) School level

_b) Circuit level

_c) Regional level

_d) National level

_e) Supplier level

Management of Textbooks in Schools

14) Are systems are in place at schools (your school) for keeping track of books in (your)

schools? [If yes, please record briefly what systems, or how they go about keeping track of deliveries, issues of books to learners, write-offs, etc.]

_a) Inventory (stock) register for recording books received, losses of books, books

written off or discarded for other reasons

_b) Issue register (books issued to learners and teachers, including at least the date of

issue, the name of the learner/teacher, and an indication whether the book was

returned (normally the date of return.)

15) What measures are in place for preventing learners from stealing each others’ textbooks?

_ a) Space provided in the textbooks for learners to enter their name

_ b) Any other (please describe) ...................................................................................................... )

16) How well have you been informed about the process and procedures of writing off

textbooks in schools? [Depending on the response below, please elaborate] ___ ‐ 1 very well

___ ‐ 2 reasonably well

___ ‐ 3 well, but there are some gaps or unexplained aspects

___ ‐ 4 not well

___ ‐ 5 not at all informed

_a) Please describe the process of writing off textbooks in schools? [The purpose of the question is to determine how well the

process is known to the respondent.]

_b) What are the weaknesses in the process of writing off textbooks? [Identify specific problems or weak points in the process of

deciding which books should be written off.] _c) What are the strengths in the process of writing off textbooks? [Identify specific good aspects of the process of deciding

which books should be written off, i.e., what is working well.]

17) What happens to textbooks that have been written off?

Contents of Textbooks

18) To what extent do the prescribed textbooks cover the syllabus? Mention specific subjects

and grades. Base your answer only on the subjects you are familiar with. [If textbooks do not cover the syllabus well, why not? – Only include the subjects included in the survey]

___ ‐ 1 all textbooks cover the syllabus well

(Subjects ............................................................................................................................... )

___ ‐ 2 half of the textbooks cover the syllabus well

(Subjects ............................................................................................................................... )

___ ‐ 3 only some textbooks cover the syllabus well

(Subjects ............................................................................................................................... )

___ ‐ 4 none of the textbooks cover the syllabus well

(Subjects ............................................................................................................................... )

___ ‐ 5 none of the textbooks cover the syllabus well

(Subjects ............................................................................................................................... )

___ ‐ 6 I am familiar with the subject, but don’t know the answer or are not sure

(Subjects ............................................................................................................................... )

19) [Teachers only] Please describe problems you experience in the use of textbooks:

a) Regarding the quality of the physical aspects (size, durability, printing, etc.)

.................................................................................................................................................................

b) Regarding the quality of the contents

.................................................................................................................................................................

Storage [Principal/Teacher]

20) Where do you store textbooks at your school? Mention all that apply, i.e., any storage space

where a significant number of books is stored. [If not stored in a separate room, please ask why not?]

___ ‐ 1 separate storeroom(s)

___ ‐ 2 storeroom(s) mainly intended for other purposes, for example for storing

equipment, office records, etc.

___ ‐ 3 Principal’s office

___ ‐ 4 staff room (tea room)

___ ‐ 5 hallway

___ ‐ 6 no storeroom, textbooks are stored in various classrooms

21) Is the storage space for textbooks in your school adequate? [If inadequate, very inadequate and not at all adequate, please ask why?]

___ ‐ 1 very inadequate (there is no storage space, or less than one third of the storage

space required)

___ ‐ 2 inadequate (between one third and two thirds of the space required)

___ ‐ 3 reasonably adequate (sufficient for two thirds or more of the books which need to

be stored, but not for all)

___ ‐ 4 adequate (sufficient for all books which must be stored)

22) Are all textbooks for all grades stored in the same room? [If not, please ask why?] ___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no

_a) If no, in how many separate rooms are textbooks stored?

_b) If no, textbooks of which grades are grouped together and stored in the same room?

23) [this must be done using measuring tape] What is the size of your storage

room? [please record in square meters] __________________

24) Are there shelves in Storeroom for textbooks? [by direct observation] [If not, please ask why?] ___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no

25) [this must be done using a measuring tape] What is the size of the shelves in

your storage room? [please record in meters of shelf space]: _________ m of shelf‐space

26) Are storerooms locked at all times? [If not, please ask why?] ___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no

_a) Was the storeroom locked at the time of observation? [by direct observation] [If not, please ask why?]

___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no

_b) If not, was there a lock on the door of the storeroom? [by direct observation]

___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no

27) Does the storeroom have glass/wooden windows? [by direct observation] ___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no

28) If yes, are the glass/wooden windows broken or not ? [by direct observation] [If yes, please ask why?] ___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no

29) Is the storeroom protected from the following [by direct observation] [If not protected from any of the risk mentioned below, please ask why?] ___ ‐ 1 rain, floods

___ ‐ 2 rodents

___ ‐ 3 theft ___ ‐ 4 fire

Durability and Care of Textbooks [school level only]

30) How many years do textbooks which are used for most of the year, generally last? [Also Obtain answers to questions a) to c) below]

___ ‐ 1 less than 1 year

___ ‐ 2 more than 1 but less than 2 years

___ ‐ 3 more than 2 but less than 3 years ___ ‐4 more than 3 but less than 4 years

___ ‐ 5 more than 4 but less than years

___ ‐ 6 more than 5 years

_a) Are there significant difference between different books in terms of their durability?

.................................................................................................................................................................

b) What are the main reasons for textbooks not lasting long?

.................................................................................................................................................................

c) What are the main reasons for textbooks lasting long?

.................................................................................................................................................................

31) Is there a norm for the number of years textbooks must be used before they may be written

off?

_a) If yes, what is the norm?

_b) If yes, is the norm realistic, or do books normally last for longer or shorter periods?

_c) If the norm is not realistic, do books normally last longer […..] or shorter […..] than

they are supposed to last according to the norm? Or does this depend on the

particular books? [Please elaborate]

....................................................................................................................................................

32) How often are textbooks replaced by different textbooks while they were still in a condition

where they could still be used? [this means, how often are textbooks replaced because they are no longer approved, and not because they are worn out] – Please elaborate if it happens often, i.e., more than once every few years. Mention specific subjects in such cases.

.................................................................................................................................................................

33) What is done in your school, or schools you deal with as inspector and/or Ministry

manager, to ensure that learners take good care of their books?

.................................................................................................................................................................

34) Are problems experienced in the return of textbooks by learners at the end of the year, or

any other point in time, when textbooks are supposed to be returned? If yes, what kind of

problems are experienced?

35) How many books were:

_a) Lost and not returned in 2008 _______ [Do not know is also a response]

_b) Returned in a state which made it necessary to write off the textbook while it should

still have lasted two or more years (end 2008) ____________ [Do not know is also a response]

36) What measures are in place to ensure that learners do return their books?

.................................................................................................................................................................

37) What causes textbook damages, losses or premature write‐offs?

___ ‐ 1 natural reasons (rain, floods, rodents, fire)

___ ‐ 2 poor handling of textbooks by learners

___ ‐ 3 poor quality of books ___ ‐4‐ learners loosing books

Annex C

Focus Group Discussion Instrument

Annex C: Focus Group Discussion Instrument

VERSION 2 ‐ 07/10/2009

Textbook Procurement Baseline Survey

Focus Group Discussion Instrument Learners

Prepared by SIAPAC for MCA

Information

Contact Details

Name of Region

Name of School

School Code

Type of School ___ ‐ 1 Secondary School

___ ‐ 2 Primary School

___ ‐ 3 Combined School

Number of Participants ___ ‐ 1 Males

___ ‐ 2 Females

Date and Time

Date: Time:

Co‐operation

______ ‐ 1 high ______ ‐ 2 medium ______ ‐ 3 low

High: All participants actively participate Medium: Half of the participants actively participate Low: Less than half of the participants actively participate

[Explain that we, SIAPAC, have been contracted by Ministry of Education to carry out a Baseline Textbook Survey. The overall aim of the Textbook Procurement Baseline Study is to improve learners’ access to textbooks and improve the management and utilisation of textbooks within primary and secondary schools. The Ministry of Education (MOE) commissioned this study to “collect detailed information on textbooks across schools in Namibia to find out the exact level of textbooks presence for each Namibian school for English, Maths and Science.]

[Explain that their comments are confidential, and that we will not be attributing their comments by name or position.]

Introductory Question

1) As a first question, could you please tell me your name, age and grade that you are in? [Remind participants that their comments are confidential and that their names will not be linked to any of their responses]

Utilisation of Textbooks

2) Do all of you usually receive textbooks at the beginning of school years?

___ ‐ 1 yes [ask 2a] ___ ‐ 2 no [ask 2a]

2a) Did learners receive Mathematics textbooks at the beginning of this (2009) school

year?

___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no[ask i]

If not, when did learners receive their Mathematics textbooks?

___ ‐ 1 no later than the second month in school year

___ ‐ 2 no later than the third month in school year

___ ‐ 3 no later than the fourth month in school year

___ ‐ 4 no later than the fifth month in school year ___ ‐ 5 no later than the sixth month in school year ___ ‐ 6 normally after the sixth month in school year

___ ‐ 7 did not receive textbooks at all

2b) Did learners receive English textbooks at the beginning of this (2009) school year?

___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no[ask i]

If not, when did learners receive their English textbooks?






2c) Did learners receive their Science textbooks at the beginning of this (2009) school

year?

___ ‐ 1 yes

___ ‐ 2 no[ask i]

If not, when did learners receive their Science textbooks?






3) Do you know of cases where two or more learners had to share Mathematics textbooks for

the entire year 2009 so far?

___ ‐ 1 yes [ask a, b and c] ___ ‐ 2 no

3a) If yes, how did sharing of Mathematics textbooks by two or more learners for the

entire year impact upon their ability to study?

3b) If yes, how did learners cope with the situation of sharing Mathematics textbooks?

4) Do you know of cases where two or more learners had to share English textbooks for the

entire year 2009 so far?

___ ‐ 1 yes [ask a, b and c] ___ ‐ 2 no

4a) If yes, how did sharing of English textbooks by two or more learners for the entire

year impact upon their ability to study?

4b) If yes, how did learners cope with the situation of sharing English textbooks?

5) Do you know of cases where two or more learners had to share Science textbooks for the

entire year 2009 so far?

___ ‐ 1 yes [ask a, b and c] ___ ‐ 2 no

5a) If yes, how did sharing of Science textbooks by two or more learners for the entire year

impact upon their ability to study?

5b) If yes, how did learners cope with the situation of sharing Science textbooks?

6) Were there times during the 2009 school year when learners could not take Mathematics

textbooks home with them?

___ ‐ 1 yes [ask a and b] ___ ‐ 2 no

6a) If yes, under which circumstances could learners not take Mathematics textbooks

home with them?

6b) How does this affect learners’ ability to study for Mathematics?

7) Were there times during the 2009 school year when learners could not take English


___ ‐ 1 yes [ask a and b] ___ ‐ 2 no

7a) If yes, under which circumstances could learners not take English textbooks home

with them?

7b) How does this affect learners’ ability to study for English?

8) Were there times during the 2009 school year when learners could not take Science


___ ‐ 1 yes [ask a and b] ___ ‐ 2 no

8a) If yes, under which circumstances could learners not take Science textbooks home

with them?

8b) How does this affect learners’ ability to study for Science?

9) Were there times during the 2009 school year when a class teacher only had one learner

textbook for the entire class? Has this happened for Maths, English or Science?

9a) Mathematics

___ ‐ 1 yes [ask a] ___ ‐ 2 no

If yes, how does this impact upon learners’ ability to study for this subject?

9b) English

___ ‐ 1 yes [ask a] ___ ‐ 2 no


9c) Science

___ ‐ 1 yes [ask a] ___ ‐ 2 no


10) When learners received textbooks for Maths, English and Science at the beginning of the

school year, in what state were the textbooks: good, fair, poor.

10a) Mathematics

___ ‐ 1 good [new, one year old or undamaged] ___ ‐ 2 fair [usable for a further two years] ___ ‐ 3 poor [in last year of service]

10b) English


10c) Science


11) Generally, to what extent do learners at your school take care of textbooks? [Take care means that learners cover textbooks with protective plastic or paper, keep textbooks from rain, turn pages so that it does not tear, do not write in textbooks, carry books in bags] [Depending on the response below, please elaborate why and how] ___ ‐ 1 always take good care of textbooks

___ ‐ 2 sometimes take good care of textbooks

___ ‐ 3 never take good care of textbooks

12) [Ask secondary school learners only] When you read your textbooks, do you

understand and comprehend what you read, without support from your teacher, or do you

need your teacher to explain the content of the textbook to you.? [Depending on the response below, please elaborate] ___ ‐ 1 always understand without explanation from teacher

___ ‐ 2 sometimes understand without explanation from teacher

___ ‐ 3 never understand without explanation from teacher

13) When learners study for Mathematics, how helpful are the textbooks? [Depending on the response below, please elaborate] ___ ‐ 1 very helpful

___ ‐ 2 helpful

___ ‐ 3 little helpful

___ ‐ 4 not helpful at all

14) When learners study for English, how helpful are the textbooks? [Depending on the response below, please elaborate] ___ ‐ 1 very helpful

___ ‐ 2 helpful



15) When learners study for Science, how helpful are the textbooks? [Depending on the response below, please elaborate] ___ ‐ 1 very helpful

___ ‐ 2 helpful



Durability and Care of Textbooks [school level only]

16) How do you as learners ensure that you take good care of your textbooks?

17) What is done by Principals and teachers to ensure that learners take good care of their

books?

18) Are problems experienced in the return of textbooks by learners at the end of the year, or

any other point in time, when textbooks are supposed to be returned? If yes, what kind of

problems are experienced?

19) What measures are in place to ensure that learners do return their books? Please describe

the system that Principles/Teachers have in place to record textbooks that are returned?

20) What causes textbook damages and losses and why? [Depending on the response below, please elaborate why] ___ ‐ 1 natural reasons (rain, floods, rodents, fire)

___ ‐ 2 poor handling of textbooks by learners

___ ‐ 3 poor quality of books ___ ‐4‐ learners loosing books

We have come to the end of this discussion, thank you very much for your participation.

This is sincerely appreciated.

Annex D

List of Key Informant Interviews

Annex D: List of Key Informant Interviews

Number of KIIs at Regional Level with Comments

Region KII Completed

1 Caprivi 1 out of 1

2 Erongo 0 out of 1

3 Hardap 1 out of 1

4 Karas 1 out of 1

5 Khomas 1 out of 1

6 Kunene 1 out of 1

7 Kavango 1 out of 1

8 Otjozondjupa 1 out of 1

9 Omaheke 1 out of 1

10 Omusati 1 out of 1

11 Ohangwena 1 out of 1

12 Oshana 1 out of 1

13 Oshikoto 1 out of 1

Total 12 out of 13

Number of KIIs at Circuit Level per Region



2 Erongo 1 out of 1

3 Hardap 0 out of 2

4 Karas 3 out of 3

5 Khomas 3 out of 3

6 Kunene 2 out of 3







13 Oshikoto 3 out of 6

Total 37 out of 58

Number of KIIs at School Level with Comments



2 Erongo 3 out of 4

3 Hardap 6 out of 6

4 Karas 4 out of 4

5 Khomas 7 out of 7

6 Kunene 5 out of 5







13 Oshikikoto 16 out of 18

Total 134 out of 150

Annex E

List of Focus Group Discussions

Annex E: List of Focus Group Discussions

# Region Name of School

1. Ngoma Primary School 1. Caprivi

2. Mayuni Secondary School

3. !Oe#gab Primary School 2. Erongo

4. Martin Luther High School

5. Aris Grudnschule 3. Khomas

6. Eldorado Secondary School

7. Frans Frederick Primary School 4. Kunene

8. Outjo Secondary School

9. Marmer Primary School 5. Karas

10. Lordsville Junior Secondary School

11. K. W. von Marees Primary School 6. Otjozondjupa

12. Waterberg Junior Secondary School

13. Anamulenge Primary School 7. Omusati

14. Negumbo Secondary School

15. Ohangwena Junior Primary School 8. Ohangwena

16. Udjombala Junior Secondary School

17. Ombuga Combined School 9. Oshana

18. Oshakati Junior Secondary School

19. Oshikomba Junior Primary School 10. Oshikoto

20. Ontananga Junior Secondary School

21. Katar Primary School 11. Kavango

22. Shamangorwa Senior Secondary School

23. Ruimte Primary School 12. Hardap

24. Pioneer Junior Secondary School

25. Gqaina Primary School 13. Omaheke

26. Epako Junior Secondary School

Annex F

Data

Annex F: Data

Textbook Baseline Study Data

1. Introduction

The data collected and the data captured on computer as part of the Textbook Baseline Study have been provided to the MCA in compliance with the relevant clauses of Section 2.5(1) of Appendix A of the Contract between the MCA and GOPA/SIAPAC Joint Venture. The structure of the data has been outlined below, and the data cleaning rules and procedures applied have been described.

2. Data files

Two data sets have been provided: (a) the Textbook Control Form data and (b) the 10% Sample Survey data.

The Textbook Control Form data consists of the data collected by the Ministry of Education using Textbook Control Form 01 (textbook orders) and Textbook Control Form 03 (textbook inventory.)

The 10% Sample Survey data consists of the textbook counts (inventory) and learner counts.

The data have been provided in Microsoft Excel and Microsoft Access format:

o Textbook study data 01.xls (Excel)

o Textbook survey.mdb (Access)

Each of these files includes both above-mentioned data sets.

Textbook study data 01.xls

The data have been stored in four worksheets:

o Orders Textbook Control Form 01 data

o Inventory Textbook Control Form 03 data

o Survey_books 10% Sample Survey book counts

o Survey_learners 10% Sample Survey learner counts

The column headings are self-explanatory in general. Some clarification may, though, be helpful:

2

Worksheet Column heading Explanation

Orders Unit The unit as stated in the NIED Textbook Catalogue, e.g. LU = Learner Unit

Pre_2007 An “X” in this column indicates that the book title was not included in any of the Textbook Catalogues from 2007 to 2009

Inventory Good, Fair, …, In use These columns correspond to the columns containing book counts on Textbook Control Form 03

Enrolment Enrolment in subject reported on Textbook Control Form 03

Survey_books Class The class group in the particular grade. Classes K, L, etc. were used for recording teacher materials, and do not represent any classes in the school.

Grade_range The grade range for which the book is intended according to the Textbook Catalogue

Survey_learners Age_06, etc. Number of learners in the respective age groups

Textbook survey.mdb

A diagram showing the structure of the database and details of the data tables have been attached to this document. The database tables relating to the Textbook Control Forms have been copied from the database developed by the Ministry of Education, with small modifications in some instances.

The actual data are stored in the database tables Book_orders (Textbook Control Form 01), Stock (Textbook Control Form 03), Learner_count (10% Sample survey data Learner counts) and the joined tables Book_count_main and Book_count_books (10% Sample survey data Book counts.) The other tables are mostly code tables, for example, the table Subjects contains the subject names for the different subject codes.

Table Equi_books was created to resolve the problem of the multiple entries of book titles in the table Books. Where multiple entries exist for a book in the table Books, the column Equi_book_id in this table contains the “valid” Book_id, that is, the Book_id to which the other entries of the book have to be converted to.

The database contains four queries which were used to generate the Excel data file.

3. Data cleaning rules and procedures used to prepare the database

Textbook Control Form data

The data entry system for capturing the Textbook Control Forms was developed by the MoE. The consultants had developed a different system, but the MCA and MoE preferred using the MoE system, mainly for sustainability reasons, that is, to ensure the continued utilisation of the system by the MoE after the end of the project.

Several features and shortcomings of the data entry system have to be reported here, as they had an impact on the data. Considerable effort went, though, into “cleaning” the data, as described below.

o The system provided inadequate data verification at the time of data entry:

o It was possible to enter non-existent school codes, that is, it was possible to enter data using a school code with no school associated with that code. Those data could only be deleted. Attempts were made later to identify missing data and to again capture those forms for which there were no data in the system.

o It was possible to enter the same data more than once. Duplicate data were identified later and redundant records were deleted.

3

o There was no check on the correctness of the data. If provision had been made on the textbook control forms and in the system to enter horizontal and vertical totals, then these totals could have been utilised for verifying the consistency of the data. – Incorrect data entry was observed in some cases when the entered data were compared to the original forms while deleting duplicate entries.

The system provided for visual inspection of the data on the computer screens and by printing out the captured data. Visual inspection was used for verifying the data.

o Books were entered on the system by selecting the book title from a list of 6 245 entries. This list was compiled from the NIED book catalogues for the years 2005 to 2009. – Although the data entry system automatically moved to possible entries when the ISBN or book title was entered, the selection of a book entry was still very tedious, time-consuming and error-prone. The following problems were experienced:

o Certain books could not be located at all, that is, neither the title nor the ISBN could be located.

This was desired when the books had not been included in the NIED textbook catalogues since 2005.

In some cases books were, though, not found by the data enterers on the system, as the ISBN or title had to be entered starting with the first digits or characters of the ISBN or title in the system. The method could fail as a result of the switch from 10 to 13 digit ISBN, or because schools had not entered the title on the form in exactly the same way as it was stated in the book catalogue. – A better facility for looking up books was provided at a later stage, which resolved this problem to a considerable extent.

o The list of books included many multiple entries. These entries originated from the list having been compiled from different years’ textbook catalogues. In some cases, books also appeared in a textbook catalogue under different headings, again contributing to multiple entries.

The multiple entries resulted in a serious problem during the data analysis: The book to which each data record referred, was identified in the database by the serial number of the book in the list of books. In cases where there were several entries of the same title and/or ISBN, each of these had a different serial number, that is, they appeared to the computer system, and thus also in the analysis, as different books. This was in particular problematic in comparing different data sets, as they could no longer be linked reliably.

A “conversion table” was later compiled by the consultants with the assistance of NIED to resolve this problem to a great extent. In a number of cases it was, though, not possible to determine whether or not certain records referred to the same book. In some of these cases, the ISBN had not been stated, in others the same ISBN was apparently used for a learner textbook and the corresponding teacher’s guide.

After data entry of the Textbook Control Forms was completed, several lists of potential errors or omissions were compiled (see table below) and verified, comparing the original forms submitted by schools to the data entered on computer. Any discrepancies between the original forms and the captured data were corrected in the dataset. In this way it was also ensured, as far as reasonably possible, that all submitted forms had been captured, and that they were not duplicated.

4

Lists of potentially incorrect data used for verifying the Textbook Control Form data

The following lists were generated to identify potentially incorrect, incomplete, missing or duplicate data. The printouts generated from the captured data were compared to the forms submitted by schools and any discrepancies between

the captured data and the data on the original forms were corrected in the database.

Report Identifying fields Corrective action Notes Duplicate book entries (separate reports for the two Textbook Control Forms)

Region, School, Grade, Subject, Book Id Duplicate entries were deleted. The list was later refined to also intercept cases where a book title was duplicated under different Book Ids.

Inventory reported in a subject, but no order placed

Region, School, Grade, Subject Orders found, which had not been entered, were entered

Most cases were correct – this list was intended to identify forms which had initially been captured under an incorrect school code

Invalid school codes Subject, Grade, invalid School Code Forms searched for the incorrect school code. If not found, the records were deleted

Inconsistencies between grades entered and the grades for which books were intended

Region, School, Grade, Subject, Book ISBN and Title

Updated the data where the entries differed from the original forms

The intended grade (or grade range) was available from the book catalogues

Excessive ratios between enrolments and books ordered (added to books on hand)



The entries were only changed when they differed from the orders submitted by schools

Inconsistencies between the subjects for which books were ordered and the subjects against which the books appeared in the book catalogue

Region, School, Grade, Subject (for which books were ordered), Book ISBN and Title, Catalogue Subject Heading


In most of the listed cases the subject code was entered incorrectly – few book titles were incorrect

Zero orders (row entered on Textbook Control Form 01 with ordered quantity = 0)



Zero enrolments Region, School, Grade, Subject Updated the data where the entries differed from the original forms

10% Sample survey data

The data collection forms of the 10% Sample survey have been attached and comprise of:

o Textbook count form

o Learner count forms:

o Class-level form

o Summary form

The forms were designed to allow the data enterers to proceed from one classgroup to the next when they conducted the survey. To avoid transcription errors, the textbook count forms were not summarized in the field, but entered on computer for each classgroup. The simple structure of the learner count forms made it easy to transcribe the data to a summary form. Horizontal and vertical totals had to be calculated to verify the data.

The data entry system for the 10% Sample survey data did not allow entering any invalid school, region, grade and subject codes. All totals which had been entered on the data collection instruments were captured on computer. The data entry system then verified the sums of the entered numbers against the respective totals, and the data would not be stored if any inconsistencies were found.

The 10% Sample survey database did not allow any duplicate entries, using appropriate database rules.

The same list of books as used for the Textbook Control Form data had to be used for the 10% Sample Survey data to allow the two data sets to be linked to one another. A different facility for selecting textbooks from the list of books was developed. This facility allowed searching for books according to any part of the ISBN or book title. The relevant details of the titles found in the database were listed in a manner which made it relatively easy for the data enterer to choose the correct entry.

Missing data were identified by ensuring that the relevant subjects had been entered for each grade in each school. Comparing the grades found respectively in the learner and textbook data sets ensured that no complete grades had not been entered. The learner count form did not allow missing a complete grade during data entry by verifying the total enrolments of the school against the sum of the enrolments in the different grades.

4. Attachments

a. Database structure and details of the database tables

Book_count_books

PF School_codePF Grade_idPF ClassPF Subject_codePF Subject_level_idPF Teacher_materialsPF Book_idFK Book_type_id

Stock_good_usedStock_good_storedStock_good_totalStock_fair_usedStock_fair_storedStock_fair_totalStock_poor_usedStock_poor_storedStock_poor_totalStock_w rite_off_usedStock_w rite_off_storedStock_w rite_off_totalStock_total_usedStock_total_storedStock_not_seenStock_grand_total

Book_count_main

PF School_codePF Grade_idPK ClassPF Subject_codePF Subject_level_idPK Teacher_materials

Subject_enrolmentProjected_enrolment

Book_types

PK Book_type_idBook_typeBook_type_note

Books

PK Book_idISBNGrade_rangeTitleAuthorDate_PubPublisherUnitPrice

FK Catalogue_codeApprovedCatalogueAddedDate_AddTbook_Id

Catalogue_headings

PK Catalogue_codeHeading

Grades

PK Grade_idGradeCgrade

Learner_count

PF School_codePF Grade_idPF Sex_id

Count_05Count_06Count_07Count_08Count_09Count_10Count_11Count_12Count_13Count_14Count_15Count_16Count_17Count_18Count_19Count_20Count_21Count_22Count_23Total_count

Book_orders

PK Order_IDFK Tbook_IDFK School_Code

GradeStock_HStock_WRQtyDel

FK Subject_CodeDate_EntryTot_LearnersFrom_gradeTo_grade

Regions

PK Region_idRegion

Sample_schools

PF School_code

Schools

PK School_codeSchool

FK Region_id

Sexes

PK Sex_idSex

Stock

PK Stock_IDFK Tbook_IDFK School_codeFK Subject_code

Subject_DescGradeGoodFairPoorWrite-OffUseDate_StockTot_LearnersDelDate_Entry

Subject_catalogue_links

PF Subject_codePF Catalogue_code

Subject_levels

PK Subject_level_idSubject_level

Subjects

PK Subject_codeSubject

Equi_books

PF Book_idPF Equi_book_id

Equi_book_note

b. Database tables

Table: Book_count_books

Columns

Name Type Size School_code Long Integer 4 Grade_id Long Integer 4 Class Text 5 Subject_code Long Integer 4 Subject_level_id Long Integer 4 Teacher_materials Yes/No 1 Book_id Long Integer 4 Book_type_id Long Integer 4 Stock_good_used Integer 2 Stock_good_stored Integer 2 Stock_good_total Integer 2 Stock_fair_used Integer 2 Stock_fair_stored Integer 2 Stock_fair_total Integer 2 Stock_poor_used Integer 2 Stock_poor_stored Integer 2 Stock_poor_total Integer 2 Stock_write_off_used Integer 2 Stock_write_off_stored Integer 2 Stock_write_off_total Long Integer 4 Stock_total_used Integer 2 Stock_total_stored Integer 2 Stock_not_seen Integer 2 Stock_grand_total Integer 2

Table: Book_count_main

Columns

Name Type Size School_code Long Integer 4 Grade_id Long Integer 4 Class Text 5 Subject_code Long Integer 4 Subject_level_id Long Integer 4 Teacher_materials Yes/No 1 Subject_enrolment Long Integer 4 Projected_enrolment Long Integer 4

Table: Book_orders

Columns

Name Type Size Order_ID Long Integer 4 Tbook_ID Long Integer 4 School_Code Long Integer 4 Grade Text 5 Stock_H Long Integer 4 Stock_WR Long Integer 4 Qty Long Integer 4 Del Yes/No 1 Subject_Code Long Integer 4 Date_Entry Date/Time 8 Tot_Learners Long Integer 4 From_grade Single 4 To_grade Single 4

Table: Book_types

Columns

Name Type Size Book_type_id Long Integer 4 Book_type Text 20 Book_type_note Text 255

Table: Books

Columns

Name Type Size Book_id Long Integer 4 ISBN Text 255 Grade_range Text 255 Title Text 255 Author Text 255 Date_Pub Text 255 Publisher Text 255 Unit Text 255 Price Currency 8 Catalogue_code Text 255 Approved Yes/No 1 Catalogue Text 255 Added Yes/No 1 Date_Add Date/Time 8

Table: Catalogue_headings

Columns

Name Type Size Catalogue_code Text 6 Heading Text 85

Table: Equi_books

Columns

Name Type Size Book_id Long Integer 4 Equi_book_id Long Integer 4 Equi_book_note Memo -

Table: Grades

Columns

Name Type Size Grade_id Long Integer 4 Grade Text 16 Cgrade Text 3

Table: Learner_count

Columns

Name Type Size School_code Long Integer 4 Grade_id Long Integer 4 Sex_id Long Integer 4 Count_05 Long Integer 4 Count_06 Long Integer 4 Count_07 Long Integer 4 Count_08 Long Integer 4 Count_09 Long Integer 4 Count_10 Long Integer 4 Count_11 Long Integer 4 Count_12 Long Integer 4 Count_13 Long Integer 4 Count_14 Long Integer 4 Count_15 Long Integer 4 Count_16 Long Integer 4 Count_17 Long Integer 4 Count_18 Long Integer 4 Count_19 Long Integer 4 Count_20 Long Integer 4 Count_21 Long Integer 4 Count_22 Long Integer 4 Count_23 Long Integer 4 Total_count Long Integer 4

Table: Regions

Columns

Name Type Size Region_id Long Integer 4 Region Text 255

Table: Sample_schools

Columns

Name Type Size School_code Long Integer 4

Table: Schools

Columns

Name Type Size School_code Long Integer 4 School Text 255 Circuit Text 20 Region_id Long Integer 4

Table: Sexes

Columns

Name Type Size Sex_id Long Integer 4 Sex Text 20

Table: Stock

Columns

Name Type Size Stock_ID Long Integer 4 Tbook_ID Long Integer 4 School_code Long Integer 4 Subject_code Long Integer 4 Subject_Desc Text 60 Grade Text 5 Good Long Integer 4 Fair Long Integer 4 Poor Long Integer 4 Write-Off Long Integer 4 Use Long Integer 4 Date_Stock Date/Time 8 Tot_Learners Long Integer 4 Del Yes/No 1 Date_Entry Date/Time 8

Table: Subject_catalogue_links

Columns

Name Type Size Subject_code Long Integer 4 Catalogue_code Text 6

Table: Subject_levels

Columns

Name Type Size Subject_level_id Long Integer 4 Subject_level Text 16

Table: Subjects

Columns

Name Type Size Subject_code Long Integer 4 Subject Text 100

Table: Survey_subjects

Columns

Name Type Size Subject_code Long Integer 4 Subject Text 50

Annex G

Proposed Textbook Control Form .03

Annex G: Proposed Textbook Control Form .03 The form on the following page is proposed to improve the reporting of stock counts and to provide horizontal and vertical totals which can be used by the data entry system for verifying the entered data.

1

Region:

School code: School:

Subject code: Subject:

Grade: Enrolment in subject:

Stock counts ISBN or Catalogue code

Textbook title or Description of LSM

New Fair Poor Write-off Total stock

Stock in use

Stock stored

Total / subtotal:

Prepared by: Signature: Certified correct by: Signature:

Name: Name:

Date: Post:

Has this form been continued on another page?

If “yes”, tick the box on the right and enter the subtotal of this page in the first row of the stock counts on the next form. Staple the forms belonging together. Date:

Textbook Control Form .03

Republic of Namibia

Ministry of Education

Textbook and LSM Inventory Register A

textbook procurement baseline study - mca · pdf filetextbook procurement baseline study 4.2.6...

Documents