Introduction

Textbooks play a substantial role in primary and secondary school education across the different regions of the world (Lee et al. 2020). Textbooks are perceived as a source of knowledge in the classroom (Vera 2018) and have been shown to influence the strategies teachers employ when teaching, and the sequence in which teaching and learning occur (Hansen 2018; Lee and Catling 2017). Bangladesh is one of the few countries where the government continues to regulate the development, production, and distribution of all primary and secondary school textbooks and the National Curriculum and Textbook Board [NCTB] has the ultimate authority in this case. Of relevance to this paper are the Bangladeshi primary school science textbooks that are distributed to all primary schools by the NCTB, free of cost, at the beginning of each year. The teachers are required to use only these NCTB-designed mandated textbooks in their classrooms (Ministry of Education [MoE] 2010). That means the teachers have no other options for textbooks since the end-of-year examination is centrally controlled. In recent years, these mandated textbooks were redeveloped, following the Education Policy 2010 (Ministry of Education [MoE] 2010) with technical assistance from the Japan International Cooperation Agency [JICA], from a teacher-directed content approach to a student-centred inquiry-based approach. The shift to an inquiry-based textbook is the focus of this paper.

Textbooks are authored, whether the textbooks are mandated or optional (Catling and Lee 2017). Textbook authors make decisions as to what is the necessary content, how that content is best represented on the textbook page, and what pedagogical approach is appropriate for any given content (Lee et al. 2020). Importantly, the authors must consider the purpose of the textbook, the students’ age, and the teachers’ ability to teach the content in an engaging way that deepens student learning (Catling and Lee 2017). However, given this research into textbooks, there are few studies exploring textbook authors’ and publishers’ stances and their reasons for, and approaches to, writing these key classroom resources (Otto 2018).

Science Textbooks and Author Perspectives

Research relating to the inclusion of “inquiry” in textbooks is extensive and varied. Just a sample of this research relates to:

  • the inquiry-based tasks included in science textbooks (Aldahmash et al. 2016; Dunne et al. 2013; Lewis 2012; Li et al. 2018; Stavros 2016; Yang et al. 2019),

  • a specific inquiry process skill or practice promoted in science textbooks and/or curriculum materials such as argumentation (Arias et al. 2017; Larraín et al. 2017; Lazarou et al. 2016), and

  • “all” inquiry process skills promoted in science textbooks (Cayvaz et al. 2020; Duruk et al. 2017).

The above research highlights a continued focus of studies into textbooks and curriculum documents over time; however, with the exception of Ma et al. (2019), the studies do not indicate if science textbooks are successfully promoting inquiry process skills. There needs to be further research that explores science textbooks’ structure and content around inquiry process skills, especially in those contexts where the textbook is a state-mandated education resource. From this point onwards, inquiry process skills will be referred to as IPS.

In addition to research concerning the textbook content and structure around IPS, researchers have pointed out that the voice of textbook authors is largely unheard, and considered to be a blind spot (Catling and Lee 2017; Otto 2018). Catling and Lee lead the research in this area in terms of work in Geography textbooks used in schools in England (Catling and Lee 2017; Lee and Catling 2016, 2017; Lee et al. 2020). Lee et al. (2020) conducted a seven country textbook study and contended that it is important to understand textbook authors’ perspectives. This is particularly so in different contexts (like Bangladesh) where there is one government-mandated textbook series for science, compared to nations (like Australia) where textbook publication is a commercial and competitive venture. The Catling and Lee studies explore textbook authors’ intentions independent of a textbook series, whereas our study explored the intentions voice of textbook professionals (textbook authors and associated publishers) behind the development of IPS in the mandated science textbooks in Bangladeshi primary schools.

Inquiry in Bangladesh

The secondary science curriculum of the National Curriculum and Textbook Board [NCTB] (2012) promoted the vision of scientific literacy and suggested the use of inquiry in science lessons. However, the secondary science textbooks were found to be content focused and teachers used lecture methods in their secondary science lessons with no student engagement (Babu 2016; Hoq 2019; Shahidullah 2016). Most of the available literature concerning inquiry-based practices in Bangladesh focused on secondary science education while the situation of higher education remains largely neglected. However, one unpublished thesis explored the nature of teaching and learning practices of practical work in a higher education teaching institute in Bangladesh. Chakraborty and Rahman (2016) reported that the teaching institute conducted recipe-style practical classes and focused extensively on content learning. The movement is to now mandate the use of inquiry-based practices in the primary science classrooms to facilitate inquiry thinking and prepare the students for further student-centred learning.

Research Methodology

Analytical Framework

We were unable to locate an existing framework to analyse the broad range of IPS included in the Bangladeshi primary science textbooks. Hence, we considered existing frameworks reported in the research literature, as well as current policy documents and science curricula. Beard (1969), Gerald Dillashaw and Okey (1980), and Padilla et al. (1984) all utilized the Science—A Process Approach (SAPA) (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] 1964) materials in their research. The SAPA materials aimed to develop the child’s skills in using the processes of science and categorized the science process skills into two:

  1. 1.

    basic/simple process skills: observing, inferring, measuring, communicating, predicting, classifying, and communicating

  2. 2.

    integrated process skills: controlling variables, defining operationally, formulating hypotheses, interpreting data, experimenting, and formulating models.

The SAPA framework does not include two essential components of inquiry: questioning and constructing arguments. This meant that using this analytical framework would be potentially limiting. Subsequently, the American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] (1990) published a report which introduced the overarching goal of science education for all American students and played a titular role in the publication of Benchmarks for Science Literacy (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] 1994, 2009). This publication stated that the skills are important in their own right. However, the report did not specify the IPS that are needed for the children and discussed three strands in general—manipulation and observation, communication, and critical response skills.

It is the differences among the policy papers that led us to consider a range of documents (Mullis and Martin 2017; National Research Council [NRC] 2000, 2012; The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] 2018) and science curricula (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA] 2017; Department for Education [DfE], 2013; Ministry of Education [MoE] 2014; The Curriculum Development Council [CDC] 2002) from different regions of the world that outline and define a wide range of IPS (see Table 1). By combining the SAPA science process skills and those identified in Table 1, we created an analytical framework for our study—the Science Textbook Inquiry Process Skills (STIPS) Framework—sensitive to the Bangladeshi context—see Table 2.

Table 1 Identifying IPS in policy documents and science curricula
Full size table
Table 2 The Science textbook inquiry process skills (STIPS) framework
Full size table

Table 2 is the STIPS Framework that provides an operational definition of 14 IPS commonly found in the international policy documents and science curricula. Along with the operational definition of each IPS, the STIPS Framework provides an example of how each IPS might be included in primary science textbooks. We used the STIPS Framework and its operational definitions as a guide during the Bangladesh primary science textbook analysis. We acknowledge that the analysis was subjective and verbatim definitions were not expected.

Research Question

Based on the Bangladeshi textbook context, and the literature reviewed above, this study explored the inclusion of the IPS in the new primary science textbooks of Bangladesh and investigated the perspectives of two textbook professionals responsible for the writing of these textbooks. The research question we were concerned with was: What is the nature of the inclusion of IPS in the primary science textbooks for Classes three, four, and five? At no point did we consider that our study would be representative of all textbooks, instead we aimed to offer insights into the nature of mandated textbooks as key teaching resources in the context of Bangladesh.

Research Procedure and Data Collection

We conducted a content analysis of the three primary science textbooks mandated for the teaching of science to all Bangladeshi children. The population of Bangladesh is approximately 163.7 million, of which 28% of this population is aged between 0 and 14 (Ministry of Finance [MoF] 2020; World Bank [WB] 2019). Hence, these state-mandated textbooks are intended for the 28% who are the young population of Bangladesh in Class three, Class four, and Class five. The Class three, four, and five primary science textbooks have 13, 13, and 14 chapters respectively, and have 3–5 lessons in each chapter. Each lesson starts with a key question, involves students in collecting, recording, and later, interpreting the data. Figure 1 depicts a sample lesson from Class three primary science textbook (Chapter 6, Lesson 2, Page 38–39). The textbook series is available online (http://www.nctb.gov.bd/).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Sample lesson activity

Full size image

Ma et al. (2019) outlined that content analysis was a research method that included the screening of each page of the textbook systematically and analysing the content based on identified categories. Our pre-determined categories were the 14 IPS outlined in the STIPS Framework (see Table 2). A frequency analysis of the IPS occurrences or omissions created a general picture of how IPS were included in the primary science textbooks in Bangladesh. For example, where the textbook instructed the student to classify the fruits according to different seasons [Class three, 2019, page 43], the action verb classify was considered. Thus, classify was included in the frequency analysis against the IPS of classifying.

In addition, two semi-structured interviews with two textbook professionals (TP 1 and TP 2) explored the authors’ and publishers’ intentions as recommended by Lee and Catling (2017). TP 1 was a university academic [involved in science textbook development for 8 years] whereas TP 2 was an official [involved in science textbook development for 9 years] in the National Curriculum and Textbook Board [NCTB], Bangladesh, working exclusively in the science textbook development team. Both TP 1 and TP 2 possessed university degrees (bachelor or higher) in science. Each interview lasted for 60 min, was audio-recorded and transcribed, then translated from Bangla to English to illuminate the emphases of different IPS in the primary science textbooks.

Results and Discussion

Overall Results of Textbook Content Analysis

Figure 2 presents the frequency comparison of the 14 IPS following the STIPS Framework analysis for the three textbooks—Class three, Class four, and Class five. The textbook analysis found two IPS were omitted: “questioning” and “constructing arguments.” The three primary science textbooks began each lesson with a textbook provided question and neither the teacher nor the student was encouraged to pose questions. The three primary science textbooks did promote student discussion; however, the notion of argumentation was omitted.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Frequency comparison of the three textbooks

Full size image

There was a high emphasis on three of SAPA’s basic/simple process skills: observing, recording, and communicating. This is not surprising given the ages of the children using the textbook. In relation to the “observing” in Class three, students observed the insides of the classroom during three lessons. In Classes three, four, and five, the students were required to observe nature (fieldwork) in one, five, and four lessons respectively. Illustrations were provided for students to observe in two lessons in Class three, three lessons in Class four, and two lessons in Class five textbooks. Students observed and experimented in six, seven, and eleven lessons in Class three, four, and five textbooks respectively.

The “recording of data” had high importance as an IPS in all three textbooks. Students were frequently asked to record their data in written format (19 lessons for Class three, and 28 and 14 lessons for Class four and five respectively). Students recorded their data visually (by sketching diagrams in a table) in two lessons in Class three and three lessons in Class four and Class five textbooks. The skill of “communicating results” [talking science] was highly promoted in all three textbooks. Students were to communicate their results orally (indicated by share your ideas with others) on 21, 26, and 19 occasions in Class three, four, and five textbooks respectively.

Design Rationale

The semi-structured interviews with TP 1 and TP 2 revealed both the values that guided the writing of each textbook and the areas of curriculum-making expertise that they each brought to the task of writing and producing the textbooks. Together the values and expertise intersect to inform the design decisions. Of particular interest to this study are the design decisions concerning the design context—of facilitating cognitive development, and learning processes, along with the corresponding design features—of coherence and the lived experience.

The values that TP 1 and TP 2 brought to the writing included learning outcomes relating to both knowledge and skills, and the learning processes. The curriculum-making expertise is a combination of TP 1 and TP 2’s understanding and knowledge of science; its pedagogy, and the teachers and students the textbooks would be used by. Cognitive development and structure are features of the design decisions made by TP 1 and TP 2.

Values

Learning is never a value-free transformation of true representations of the world transferred to the student, by the teacher, via a textbook. Classrooms are always value-laden, and any teaching resource—like a textbook—represents a particular view. In our study, the three primary science textbooks used in Bangladeshi classrooms were value-laden with the educational values of both TP 1 and TP 2. As we outlined in the sections to follow, the “type” of knowledge and skills produced in the three Bangladeshi primary science textbooks were influenced by the particular values and needs of the society in which they have been created. The decision-making process of the textbooks was informed by TP 1 and TP 2’s mind-based perspective of the diverse Bangladeshi educational context. Thus, “it is concomitant that [TP 1 and TP 2’s] culture must influence on the way that they might approach intellectual thought and reasoning” (Kidman and Casinader 2017, p. 51) behind the design decisions of the textbooks. This is an important point, as “local” textbook professionals knew the users of the textbook far better than a “foreign” textbook written for different classrooms, but translated to enable adoption in a different context. The following quotes from TP 1 and TP 2 emphasized their understanding of the context.

In the context of our country, historically, a textbook is the main teaching and learning resource for teachers and students.

Teachers do not follow the curriculum; they follow the textbook…. [TP 1].

I have used rainfall in some instances as examples. However, urban children rarely experience the chance to see rainfall. Technology is a known phenomenon for urban children. But 50% of the children in my country live in rural areas. Since the textbook is a central material, therefore we had to think about materials that would create the same opportunities for all children in my country. [TP 2]

TP 1 and TP 2 valued students to develop a scientific understanding of their world through the development of their IPS. This developing understanding and skills incorporated real-world contexts and the making of connections with everyday Bangladeshi life. TP 1 and TP 2 spoke of taking into account a focus on students’ learning, and of content access and usability for both teachers and students.

We have to ultimately push children from known to unknown and make them link [scientific concepts] together. [TP 1]

In the previous science textbooks, [the authors and publishers] combined some

information and presented it to the students. There was no opportunity to link students’ prior knowledge with the content. We have tried this in the new textbooks for the first time. [TP 2]

TP 1 and TP 2 placed a strong emphasis on the learning processes. There is an emphasis on the constructivist approach where textbook features encourage students to use their own experiences, and authenticity of task and learning experiences. TP 2 commented on this aspect:

We were in a content-led education. Maybe, we still are, in some ways. However, we have tried [to create a space] for students to explore, to build up the confidence [in children] to explore. [TP 2]

Constructivism has been nurtured by textbooks. In our teacher’s guide, we have asked teachers to explore students’ prior knowledge or previous experiences. Then the children will do some activities alone. After that, he/she will present the findings in a group of 8-10. Therefore, the child has to debate with others [students]….When a child has to summarise others’ findings, they have to engage in greater discussion. This discussion will lead to logical thinking and open-mindedness, as one has to show logic and be open-minded to listen to others' logic and provide counter-arguments. [TP 2]

The obvious biases in the development of some IPS indicated TP 1 and TP 2’s value for the recording of data as a form of evidence, and the communication of the findings. This need for data and evidence is central to the questioning habit of mind. TP 1 and TP 2 valued the engagement with data as a form of evidence someone uses to support his or her ideas, then the more likely others will accept these ideas. We could see a bias towards data being collected from the real-world of the student, through making observations, as opposed to being present in the mind of the student or teacher as a consequence of rational thought.

Expertise

Hatano et al. (1986) described two types of expertise: routine expertise, and adaptive expertise. Routine expertise involves the mastering of procedures so that an individual, in our case a textbook author, becomes highly efficient at writing textbooks. However, having adaptive expertise would involve the experienced textbook writer to develop new conceptual understandings of effective primary science textbooks—new pedagogical designs demand new design decisions. In relation to this paper, the adaptive expert textbook author and publisher will demonstrate a flexible knowledge and performance of inquiry-based teaching and learning. We contend that TP1 and TP 2 were indeed utilising adaptive expertise to varying degrees as they designed the three textbooks. We consider the design of a textbook series developing IPS to involve a continuum of adaptive ability. TP 1 and TP 2 drew upon their 8 and 9 years (respectively) of content-based textbook design to invent new activities and pedagogical procedures; they recognized when their previously practiced rules and principles did not apply.

Although inquiry-based teaching and learning is a new pedagogical approach in Bangladesh, we further contend that TP 1 and TP 2 had a developing inquiry literacy despite not previously having participated in inquiry-based teaching and learning activities in a primary school setting. Inquiry literacy is described by Shore et al. (2009, p. 140) as “…the individual’s capacity to critically understand and use the language, symbols, and skills of inquiry, and to reflect on their meaning and usage during and after the activity….” In order to be inquiry literate, TP 1 and TP 2 needed to make textbook design decisions relating to four elements:

  1. 1.

    The user of the textbooks—the student and the teacher

  2. 2.

    The text—language and images

  3. 3.

    The social setting, culture, or environment in which the textbooks are to be used

  4. 4.

    The temporal notion inherent in a developmental view of understanding

In the following sections, we use the words of TP 1 and TP 2 to illustrate their adaptive expertise and inquiry literacy against a background of justifications for the IPS biases and IPS omissions evident in Fig. 2. We do this through an exploration of the design decisions (design context and design features).

Design Context and Design Features

Lee et al. (2020) outline elements relating to the design context and associated design features of a textbook. Those of particular relevance to this study are Cognitive Development and Learning Processes. Cognitive development takes into account students’ learning, but here we extend this learning to include the teacher as the teachers are learning inquiry processes as they teach them; the logical sequencing of activities. Learning processes enable student learning, would incorporate fieldwork, and encourage students and teachers to use their own experiences for their learning encouraging hands-on experiences and the opportunities to work with others. Operational features were a key consideration.

Cognitive development was evidenced in the textbooks as shown in the content analysis in Fig. 2, and the words of TP 1 and TP 2. We define it here to indicate a planned progressive structure to the textbooks, building a developing understanding into an emergent sense of science as a subject. Cognitive development is illustrated through the notion of taking prior knowledge and skills into account and not subjecting the learner to cognitive overload. As stated earlier, the IPS of “questioning” was omitted by textbook professionals. The policy documents and science curricula show that student and/or teacher generated questions are often the starting point for classroom inquiry-based practices (Kidman and Casinader 2017). In terms of questioning, the three primary science textbooks begin each lesson with a textbook provided question but neither the teacher nor the students were encouraged to pose questions. Earlier we stated personal and cultural values were incorporated into textbooks, and the relevance of these values became known in terms of cognitive development. TP 1 had strong values for quality teaching and to facilitate its development, and this is a design feature of the textbook especially relating to the “questioning” omission. Both TP 1 and TP 2 agreed that “questioning [was] an inquiry process skill”; however, TP 1 explained why the questions were provided in the textbooks for the teacher and student:

The model [the model of content presentation in textbook] is much clearer in the textbooks…that there will be a key question. The students will try to find the answer to the problem through activities. … I can focus on a particular skill if we consider this from the implementation point of view. The teachers in my country are not clear about inquiry [based approach]. Therefore, if we focus on everything [focus on all IPS], the teachers might not be able to do that. We cannot expect them [the students] to develop a holistic view [of inquiry] in one class. [TP 1]

This lack of questioning has also been observed by Yang et al. (2019) and Aldahmash et al. (2016) who also found that the skill of asking questions was rarely involved in the science textbooks of Mainland China and Saudi Arabia respectively. It is hoped that beginning each lesson with a textbook posed question in all three primary science textbooks in Bangladesh will promote, among teachers and students, an understanding that an inquiry needs to begin with a question. Providing such questions is considered to facilitate the reduction of cognitive load for both the teachers and students.

Earlier we considered TP 1 and TP 2 having adaptive expertise. We do not consider this to be a fixed state, but rather as fluid expertise where at times TP 1 and TP 2 were developing their adaptive expertise, and progressing along a continuum. The lack of recognition that at least some consideration towards the teacher and student developing a question indicates only developing adaptive expertise. This absence of promoting the skill of questioning among students may impact students’ motivation and conceptual understanding. Oliveira (2010, p. 446) stated that “when students pose real questions, they are driven by a personal and honest desire to understand, which leads to higher levels of motivation and involvement”. Biggers (2018) elaborated by suggesting that the lack of student-posed questions lowers the curiosity and wonder of primary level students. He also stated that providing questions disempowers both teachers and students, and de-authorized teachers from negotiating shared questions with their students (Biggers 2018).

Furthermore, cognitive development was also evident in promoting the IPS: predicting and hypothesizing. Students were not required to predict or generate hypotheses in Class three textbook. The skill of predicting began in Class four and extends in Class five, with generating hypotheses appearing in Class five. Predicting can be considered as a simple process skill to be achieved by Class four students while hypothesizing is more appropriate for higher classes as it may involve the designing of tests to determine the validity of the hypothesis. TP 1 commented on this aspect:

We cannot focus on hypothesising and controlling variables at this age [meaning Class three]. Developmental age is an issue considering this. That is why integrated skills come later in higher grades [classes]. [TP 1]

TP 1 clarified that due to the notion of cognitive development, the decision was made to focus on the integrated skills like hypothesising later in higher classes, and thus, these skills began appearing in Classes four and five. This is in line with the available literature in which predicting has been considered as a simple IPS (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] 1964) or a rudimentary skill (Wenning 2005) which requires low intellectual sophistication from the students’ end whereas generating hypothesis or hypothesizing has been considered an integrated IPS (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] 1964) or basic skill (Wenning 2005) which requires more intellectual sophistication from students. Hence, hypothesizing appeared in higher classes as it may involve the experimentation skills to determine the validity of the hypothesis.

Learning processes were evidenced by the nature of the IPS activities contained in the three textbooks. Learning processes relate to the constructivist approach valued by TP 1 and TP 2. The students were required to engage in fieldwork in one, five, and four lessons respectively, and were supposed to conduct experiments (inquiry) in six, seven, and eleven lessons in Class three, four, and five textbooks respectively.

Design Features

The design features found in the three textbooks were indicative of TP 1 and TP 2’s developing inquiry literacy. A lot of consideration was placed upon the usability of each textbook. Both the teacher’s ability to teach from the textbook and the students’ learning had been considered. Context, cognitive load, and cognitive development of IPS were key considerations in the design features of the textbooks and were expertly combined with the temporal nature of developing students’ conceptual understanding. Furthermore, the structure of the lessons, the use of illustrations, and communication in science had been considered as design features of the textbook. TP 1 commented on the structure of the textbook.

The whole textbook has been divided into chapters and each chapter has been divided into multiple lessons. In each lesson, students will learn through inquiry. After that, the teacher can provide some information. Previously, the inquiry was not a major focus. Now, this whole structure has been changed. [TP 1].

The number of illustrations had increased in all three textbooks. TP 2 mentioned previously that illustrations were used to encourage children to observe. TP 1 further clarified this point by saying that

In some places, the illustrations have been used very appropriately. The characters are asking questions or encouraging discussions among children. This was done to promote learner-centredness. [TP 1]

Communicating with peers is a necessary IPS since it is useful in organizing observation events, shaping questions that stem from authentic disciplinary content, problems, and practices, making expectations explicit (Eberbach and Crowley 2009). Our finding indicated that the textbook professionals had considered the importance that language plays a significant role in science instruction (Osborne 2014) and thus, the primary students in Bangladesh will now have the opportunity to develop this aspect of disciplinary literacy. The social nature of inquiry learning is facilitated by the inclusion of verbal communication and discussions. In TP 2’s words,

When students will communicate and present their work [in front of others], they will have to debate with each other. Students will need to discuss [their ideas and findings]. Through this, the students’ concepts will become more concrete. [TP 2].

We depict this relationship between the above design rationale elements in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Formulae behind the writing of the Bangladeshi primary science textbooks

Full size image

Conclusion

The shift to an inquiry-based textbook with the voice of textbook authors and publishers was the foci of this paper. The voice of textbook authors and publishers is largely unheard of and considered to be a lesser-known territory (Catling and Lee 2017; Otto 2018). Findings revealed that the textbook promoted IPS such as observing, recording of data, and communicating results. The finding further revealed that the textbook professionals valued students’ scientific understanding of their world through the development of their IPS. We contend that the textbook professionals showed adaptive expertise to varying degrees while designing the three textbooks. Moreover, context, cognitive load, and cognitive development of IPS along with the structure of the lessons, use of illustrations, and communication in science were considered as key design features of the textbook.

It was not our intention to consider the quality of the IPS task in each textbook, which would have required a different focus. We intended to draw out from the textbook professionals’ intentions and justifications for the inclusion or absence of particular IPS in the textbooks, with the aim of determining the thinking and influences involved in textbook creation. We acknowledge that this inhibits our understanding of the quality of these particular IPS tasks, and similarly, we do not know the successes of teachers implementing the tasks—thus putting the intentions of TP 1 and TP s into practice. This is an area for further research. Much more can be added to this list for further research into what influences the thinking of primary science textbook professionals. This is the story of Bangladeshi primary science textbook professionals, and it is to be hoped that others will pursue similar research from other regions of the world, thus enabling a better understanding of the significance of textbook authorship from the perspective of the authors and publishers themselves.