![The Minister of Education, Tunji Alausa [PHOTO CREDIT: @DrTunjiAlausa]](https://i0.wp.com/media.premiumtimesng.com/wp-content/files/2026/02/640407752_18038901590754499_2448924351706284639_n-e1773343365463.jpg?resize=1200%2C750&ssl=1)
Policy inconsistency remains the bane of education in Nigeria, with every political administration or minister introducing new ideas that are, at best, good on paper. The Minister of Education is also pursuing another controversial reform by replacing the 6-3-3-4 administrative structure with a 6-6-4 arrangement, ostensibly to reduce the number of out-of-school children. No policy is 100 per cent foolproof or perfect. What matters is building consensus, ensuring sustainability, implementing reforms faithfully, and keeping education affordable and accessible for all.
Education policies have far-reaching consequences, shaping not only what students learn but also the industries and professionals that support learning. It is therefore imperative that any major reform in the education sector is preceded by broad stakeholder consultation and consensus, transparency, and careful assessment of its likely impact. This does not seem to be the case with the proposed textbook ranking policy initiative.
The Federal Government’s proposed Textbook Ranking Policy, championed by the Minister of Education, Dr Tunji Alausa, has sparked intense debate within Nigeria’s education and publishing communities. While the initiative is presented as a means of improving the quality of instructional materials, the Nigerian Publishers Association (NPA) argues that it could undermine decades of progress in educational publishing, encourage favouritism in textbook selection, threaten jobs, and create constitutional concerns over the powers of the federal and state governments in education, especially in view of the Federal Government’s stated commitment to devolve powers appropriately.
|
|
These concerns raise a fundamental question: Will the proposed policy strengthen Nigeria’s education system, or will it place publishing, teaching, and learning in peril?
The proposed structural change is both controversial and concerning. The Federal Ministry of Education frames the textbook ranking system as an intervention to lower costs and standardise quality. According to the ministry, the Nigerian Educational Research and Development Council (NERDC) will be strengthened as the regulator responsible for ranking textbooks to determine the most suitable options for each subject and level.
|
|
|
|---|
“Following this evaluation process, only a limited number of textbooks will be ranked and approved for use in schools for each subject, ensuring improved quality control and consistency in teaching and learning materials across the country,” the ministry stated.
“Under the new policy, NERDC will continue its responsibility of licensing textbooks. However, any textbook that is not ranked under the new system will not be permitted for use in Nigerian schools, regardless of its prior licensing status.”
However, the NPA and other stakeholders are not convinced and have pushed back, calling for legislative intervention. They argue that there was insufficient consultation and that no proper scrutiny was given to the novel initiative to determine its suitability. They contend that the policy could endanger educational development and erode the progress and milestones already achieved because it was neither inclusive, transparent, nor comprehensive.
Critics have also argued that the framework poses severe economic, logistical, and constitutional risks. It introduces a winner-takes-all monopoly by shifting from an open, merit-based approval list to a strict hierarchical ranking system in which only a limited number of titles per subject are permitted in classrooms. At best, this will reduce fair competition and create a significant market distortion by concentrating nationwide revenue in the hands of a few “anointed” publishing houses.
A policy that affects virtually every household – as children, parents, publishers, teachers, authors, booksellers, printers, students, and governments at all levels are directly or indirectly impacted, should have representatives of these groups at the table during its formulation. This did not happen.
Herein lies the danger of the proposed reforms. There was no inclusivity, little sensitivity to existing arrangements, and no clear framework for sustainability. Yet September 2026, the start of the next academic session, has been set as the implementation date.
As it is with our politics, polity, and governance, so it appears to be with this new policy: one man at the top who believes he has all the answers. No. That should not be the approach to education, which touches lives, moulds character, and shapes careers and national development.
Critics have also argued that the framework poses severe economic, logistical, and constitutional risks. It introduces a winner-takes-all monopoly by shifting from an open, merit-based approval list to a strict hierarchical ranking system in which only a limited number of titles per subject are permitted in classrooms. At best, this will reduce fair competition and create a significant market distortion by concentrating nationwide revenue in the hands of a few “anointed” publishing houses.
Legitimate local publishers that have invested heavily in developing educational content could find themselves abruptly shut out of the market, potentially triggering mass layoffs across the educational printing and publishing value chain. Another concern is the implementation timeline. Stakeholder engagement was clearly not adequately factored into the policy process until the pushback began.
A major paradox of the policy is that while it aims to make education more affordable for parents, the new fee structure risks achieving the exact opposite. The policy increases the assessment fee from a modest ₦300 per page to a staggering ₦2,000 per page, alongside a ₦1 million ranking fee per subject. The NPA estimates that for a single publisher to complete both the assessment and ranking processes for all basic and senior secondary school subjects, the cost would exceed ₦135.5 million. For many local firms, this surpasses their entire working capital. Those able to absorb the costs will inevitably pass them on to consumers, driving up textbook prices and increasing the financial burden on parents.
The policy is being introduced at a particularly volatile period, as publishers are already scrambling to align their materials with the newly introduced national curriculum. The compressed implementation timeline leaves publishers with very little time to properly develop, test, and print curriculum-compliant books under the new guidelines. Even more concerning is that closer scrutiny suggests that even the “top-ranked” publishers may lack the operational capacity to meet the textbook needs of Nigeria’s estimated 60 million learners within such a short period. The likely consequences are nationwide textbook shortages, increased book piracy, and higher prices.
Leading education systems emphasise textbook evaluation, approval, and recommendation, rather than ranking textbooks in a manner that confers commercial advantage on a select few publishers. These systems recognise that educational quality is enhanced when schools and teachers can choose from a range of approved textbooks that meet established standards, rather than being compelled, directly or indirectly, to rely on a limited number of highly ranked titles.
Even as power is gradually being devolved, first to local governments and potentially through the proposed creation of state police, the textbook ranking policy appears to move in the opposite direction. It could usurp the powers of states to determine the books their students should read. Under the 1999 Constitution, education is on the Concurrent Legislative List, meaning that state governments possess constitutional authority to select instructional materials that reflect their regional needs. Centralising a mandatory textbook ranking system at the federal level is viewed by legal critics as an unconstitutional expansion of federal authority. It would also reduce the flexibility of schools to choose contextual learning materials.
Although the Federal Government has insisted that state public schools and private institutions are not automatically bound by the policy, that assurance alone is insufficient. What is required is a comprehensive review and genuine stakeholder engagement before implementation begins.
Leading education systems emphasise textbook evaluation, approval, and recommendation, rather than ranking textbooks in a manner that confers commercial advantage on a select few publishers. These systems recognise that educational quality is enhanced when schools and teachers can choose from a range of approved textbooks that meet established standards, rather than being compelled, directly or indirectly, to rely on a limited number of highly ranked titles.
Countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, India, South Africa, and Ghana generally maintain systems that ensure textbooks meet prescribed educational standards, while preserving competition, diversity of learning materials, teacher choice, and affordability.
The proposed ranking policy departs from this widely accepted approach and risks creating market distortions, reducing textbook diversity, limiting professional choice, and concentrating educational content in the hands of a few providers. Nigeria’s educational policies should align with global best practices that promote quality assurance, while safeguarding competition, accessibility, innovation, and academic freedom.
Policy inconsistency remains the bane of education in Nigeria, with every political administration or minister introducing new ideas that are, at best, good on paper. The Minister of Education is also pursuing another controversial reform by replacing the 6-3-3-4 administrative structure with a 6-6-4 arrangement, ostensibly to reduce the number of out-of-school children. No policy is 100 per cent foolproof or perfect. What matters is building consensus, ensuring sustainability, implementing reforms faithfully, and keeping education affordable and accessible for all. Legislative oversight is needed to bring all stakeholders to the table for honest conversations about the future of Nigeria’s educational policies.
Zainab Suleiman Okino chairs the Blueprint Editorial Board. She is a syndicated columnist and can be reached via: [email protected]
