DESIGNING, PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
National Council of Educational Research and Training, New Delhi
ABSTRACT This is a concise report of the study undertaken by the Publication Department of the NCERT on Designing, Production and Distribution of Instructional Materials in few select States.
This report breifly describes the methodology adopted for collecting the information; the findings based on the information collected, and the recommendations for improvement in designing, production, and distribution of instructional materials.
Introduction Printed textbooks and other instructional materials have been and, in spite of the advent of the electronic media, will continue to occupy an extremely important place in the teaching-learning process in the schools in India. The much-publicised paperless (and bookless) society has not, mercifully, emerged as a practical alternative in the educational scenario in the schools. On the other hand, the number of titles, the number of copies of these titles and the number of pages have registered significant increase in recent years, not to mention the greater use of colours. These have strained the resources of the agencies responsible for publishing these textbooks, calling for managerial skills, generally associated with mass production of consumer and other goods, which, unfortunately, were either
274 IER : SPECIAL NUMBER 1995
not available in the book industry or, if available, were not taken advantage of. Furthermore, textbook publishing on a mass scale has not been recognised even today, barring a few exceptions, as a specialised, technical process, requiring the employment of trained, professional technologists and specialists in the fields of editing, designing, production, storage and distribution. State after state and agency after agency have requisitioned the services of existing administrative personnel, who have stumbled through the maze of typesetters, processors, printers, binders and book retailers. Some of them acquired a little insight, while the remaining majority refused to learn the intricacies of book production. All this resulted in poorly illustrated, ill-designed and indifferently produced textbooks.
However, the two strong points of such textbooks were the reasonable prices (since most of the agencies operated on a `no-profit-no-loss' basis or the government subsidised the costs of production) and the contents, which were more relevant to Indian ethos, as compared to the earlier textbooks.
Objectives of the Study The Publication Department (PD) of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) was entrusted with the task of undertaking a study on Designing, Production and Distribution of Instructional materials in select states under the District Primary Education Programme (DPEP). These states were: Assam, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and Tamil Nadu. The studies in six states have been completed and preliminary reports have been approved by the concerned states. However, the progress in the case of Madhya Pradesh and Orissa has been slow and the reports are yet to be drafted.
The objectives of the study were:
1. To assess the present status of designing, production and distribution of instructional and NFE materials in the states covered by the SSN and DPE projects
2. To suggest improvements/modifications, wherever necessary for each area
3. To suggest professional and technical training of the personnel, in view of technological advances
Methodology The required data was collected from each state through a main questionnaire, which was filled in by the respective Nodal Officers in consultation with the respective member of the Sub-Core Team. Thereafter two sub-questionnaires were
STUDIES ON DPEP 275
filled in by the respective Surveyors, on the basis of the surveys conducted to ascertain : (i) the availability of books, and (ii) paper and infrastructure for printing, etc. in the state. The information thus collected was analysed by the Study Team and discussed with the respective Nodal Officers. Printed books were collected from each state and were examined by a team of experts, to assess the physical qualities of the books for different classes/stages under five categories namely, typography, illustrations, printing, binding and paper, as well as the overall rating.
Findings of the Study and Recommendations Findings
1 . Generally, more than one agency is involved in the overall publishing of the textbooks. This has often resulted in lack of coordination and the different agencies have tended to follow different mechanisms.
2. Resources and finances are major problems for almost all agencies. Borrowing money from banks at high interest rates seriously affects the financial standing of the agencies.
3. Some agencies depend only on government presses for the printing of the books while other agencies confine the printing jobs to printers within their state only. In the former case, printing has been delayed and in the latter case, the printing rates have been quite high.
4. Except for a couple of agencies, the distribution of the printed books has been seriously delayed, leading to criticism and dissatisfaction.
5. Distribution-of free books is a major problem as often such free books do not reach the target group or reach very late. Further, the reimbursement on account of such free books is generally delayed with the result that the agencies face financial crunch.
6. Almost all the agencies suffer from the lack of professionally trained personnel in all the areas of book publishing.
7. In-house facilities for lasersetting, artwork preparation, designing, etc. are non-existent.
8. The physical qualities of the books need considerable improvement in almost all cases.
9. The agencies are not functionally autonomous with the result that they have to await decisions and approval from elsewhere.
10. The agencies and their various outlets do not have modern communication facilities and hence monitoring becomes difficult and cumbersome.
11. The rates of payments to authors, illustrators, editors, proof readers. etc., are poor.
276 IER: SPECIAL NUMBER 1995
12. The agencies have no control over the frequent changes made in the textbooks and, therefore, the quantities printed are sometimes less than the required number.
Recommendations 1. Multiplicity of authorities for decision-making should be avoided.
2. The agencies should be provided with sufficient working capital or a rolling fund so that they do not have to borrow money at commercial rates. Onetime interest-free loan, to be paid back in a specified time, could be another alternative.
3. Printing rates should be obtained from a wider cross-section of printers so that there is an element of competition, which would result in lower rates and help the agencies in further lowering the sale prices.
4. Inventory control and distribution have to be modernised and made more efficient. The book trade should be associated with such distribution so that the pressure on the storage space will be eased and the books will be more easily available throughout the states.
5. The agencies should not be burdened with the cost of free books. The concerned state government should pay the money to the agencies, in advance, and evolve a mechanism so that such free books do not remain in the offices/godowns of the government offices.
6. Urgent steps should be taken to train the existing staff in modern techniques of publishing and, wherever feasible, fresh professionally trained staff should be recruited.
7. The agencies should instal in-house facilities for lasersetting, illustrations, designing, etc.
8. The physical qualities of the books should be improved by engaging freelance artists, designers, typographers, editors, production personnel, etc.
9. The agencies should be made functionally autonomous but with sufficient checks and balances.
10. Modern communication facilities should be provieded.
11. The rates of payments to authors, illustrators, editors, proof readers, etc. should be periodically revised.
12. The textbooks once prescribed should continue for a minimum period of three years, unless there are compelling reasons to revise/replace them. This will enable the agencies to plan their printing programme more satisfactorily.
277