Not too long ago, the Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD) was up in arms over unapproved revision books and encyclopedias terming them ‘misleading’, ‘voluminous’ and ‘with error’. Fair enough. Now the recent public outcry as a result of the Form 3 Certificate Biology’s misleading content leaves KICD with rotten egg on its face. Talk of preaching water and drinking wine!
KICD expended a lot of energy and vigour fighting the infiltration of the industry by unapproved revision materials and was very particular with encyclopedias to the point of issuing a circular banning their stocking, sales and usage in schools.
I was with KICD on this matter until it emerged that their own approved course books have contentious content.
The fact that the curriculum developer has issued an apology and has also accepted legal and ethical liability for negligence is actually an admission of guilt albeit the damage has been suffered as the book is already in massive use across the country.
The controversy surrounding the Biology textbook is the latest in a string of troubling incidents that have plagued the institution. While this particular textbook has attracted significant public attention due to its misleading content, it only represents the tip of the iceberg.
Over the past few years, there have been numerous reports of errors and inappropriate content in textbooks approved by KICD. These issues have appeared across various subjects and educational levels, raising serious concerns about the integrity of the vetting process.
For instance, textbooks for primary and secondary schools have been found to contain factual inaccuracies, grammatical errors and culturally insensitive material that have sparked public outcry.
ALSO READ:
One of the most alarming cases involved a primary school textbook that erroneously stated that Mt. Elgon is the highest mountain in Africa, a mistake that was corrected only after it had been in circulation for years. Similarly, a history textbook contained several inaccuracies about Kenya’s colonial past, leading to confusion among students about important aspects of the country’s history. These are just a few examples of the myriad problems that have marred KICD’s reputation and raised questions about its capacity to effectively manage the curriculum development process.
The recurring errors in educational materials vetted by KICD have far-reaching implications for the quality of education in Kenya. First and foremost, these errors compromise the integrity of the education system. Students who rely on these textbooks for their studies are at risk of learning incorrect information, which can have a detrimental effect on their academic performance and overall understanding of key subjects. This is particularly concerning in subjects like science, history and geography.
Moreover, the presence of inappropriate content in some textbooks has caused significant distress among parents and educators. In some cases, materials intended for young learners have included content that is not age-appropriate, leading to confusion and concern about what children are being exposed to in the classroom. This has eroded trust in KICD’s ability to safeguard the well-being of students, who are among the most vulnerable members of society.
Teachers, who are on the front lines of education, also suffer the consequences of KICD’s failures. They are often forced to take on the additional burden of correcting errors in textbooks, which disrupt the flow of lessons and undermine their authority in the classroom. The need to constantly cross-check and verify the information provided in KICD-approved textbooks subtracts the time and energy that teachers could otherwise devote to instruction and student engagement.
The repeated failures of KICD’s vetting process suggest that there are deeper issues at play within the institution. One of the most glaring problems is the apparent lack of a robust and thorough review system. The process of vetting educational materials should involve multiple layers of scrutiny, with experts in various fields meticulously reviewing content for accuracy, relevance, and appropriateness. However, the frequency of errors in these textbooks indicates that this process may be either insufficiently rigorous or inconsistently applied.
Another contributing factor could be the lack of accountability within KICD. When errors are discovered, KICD’s typical response has been to issue public apologies and promises of future improvements. However, there has been little evidence of concrete steps being taken to address the root causes of these failures. Without accountability, there is no incentive for those involved in the vetting process to take their responsibilities seriously. This culture of complacency and reactive measures rather than proactive ones has allowed these issues to persist over time.
Resource constraints may also play a role in KICD’s shortcomings. The vetting of educational materials is a complex and resource-intensive process that requires a well-trained staff, adequate funding and sufficient time to conduct thorough reviews. If KICD is operating with limited resources, it may be cutting corners or rushing the vetting process, leading to the kinds of errors that have been observed. However, even if this is the case, it does not excuse the continued approval of substandard materials.
Addressing the systemic failures at KICD will require a multifaceted approach. First and foremost, there must be an overhaul of the vetting process to ensure that it is rigorous, comprehensive, and consistently applied. This could involve bringing in additional experts, increasing the number of review stages, and incorporating feedback from teachers and other stakeholders who have first-hand experience with the materials in question.
Accountability is another critical area that needs to be addressed. KICD must establish clear mechanisms for holding individuals accountable when errors are discovered in approved materials. This could involve disciplinary action for those responsible or even legal consequences in cases where negligence is evident. By creating a culture of accountability, KICD can begin to restore public trust in its ability to oversee the curriculum development process.
Finally, KICD should seek to increase transparency in its operations. This could involve making the vetting process more open to public scrutiny, allowing educators, parents and other stakeholders to provide input before materials are approved for use in schools. By involving the broader community in the vetting process, KICD can benefit from a wider range of perspectives and expertise, ultimately leading to higher quality educational materials.
The controversy surrounding the Biology textbook is a symptom of a much larger problem within KICD. The institution’s repeated failures in vetting educational materials have undermined the quality of education in the country and eroded public trust as well.
It is their legal mandate to vet and approve all educational materials for conformity and compliance and they must therefore take this duty with the seriousness it deserves, especially now, that the book industry has been invaded by unscrupulous publishers who have cartelized and commercialized this vital industry.
To address these issues, KICD must undertake significant reforms to ensure that its vetting process is thorough, accountable and transparent. Only by doing so can KICD fulfill its mandate of providing high-quality educational materials that truly benefit students.
By Kamomonti wa Kiambati
Kamomonti teaches English and Literature in Gatundu North sub-county
You can also follow our social media pages on Twitter: Education News KE and Facebook: Education News Newspaper for timely updates.
>>> Click here to stay up-to-date with trending regional stories
>>> Click here to read more informed opinions on the country’s education landscape
