Textbook row raises questions over review

The removal of disputed illustrations from school textbooks and the transfer of 10 National Curriculum and Textbook Board (NCTB) officials within two days have raised questions about textbook oversight, administrative accountability and the handling of politically sensitive content, with the potential cost of recalling and revising millions of printed books still unknown.

The NCTB has decided to remove all icons representing data, information, knowledge and wisdom from the Class Six Information and Communication Technology (ICT) textbook after a weighing-scale illustration triggered controversy over its association with Jamaat-e-Islami’s electoral symbol, the daripalla.

NCTB Member AKM Shawkat Ali Khan told The Daily Observer that the four concepts would remain in the revised textbook, but without illustrations. The corrected version is expected to reach students in the next academic year, with further refinements planned to prevent similar errors.

NCTB Distribution Controller Md Khairul Islam Khan said around 17 lakh of the 38 lakh printed copies had already been sent to district and upazila-level distribution points. Instructions had been issued to retrieve the books, and printing press owners had been notified of the changes. The total cost of retrieval, revision and redistribution has yet to be determined.

The textbook controversy has also been followed by a series of administrative transfers. On Monday, the Secondary and Higher Education Division of the Ministry of Education issued an order transferring nine NCTB officials. A day earlier, research officer Md Abdullah Al Zubayer, who was responsible for editing the Class Six ICT textbook, had been posted as a lecturer in political science at Khagrachhari Government Women’s College.

Among those transferred on Monday were M M Asaduzzaman, responsible for the Class Eight Bangladesh and Global Studies textbook, and research officer Mahmud Bin Amin, who was involved in editing the Class Six Bangladesh and Global Studies textbook.

Some NCTB officials have claimed that no errors linked to the controversy were found in the books edited by the transferred officers. These claims could not be independently verified. Questions have also been raised about the political affiliations of some officials, but affiliation alone does not establish responsibility for the disputed illustrations.

NCTB Chairman Professor Mohammad Fakhrul Mawla told The Daily Observer that transfers and postings were handled by the ministry and that he neither participated in the decisions nor knew the reasons behind them.
NCTB Secretary Professor Shah Muhammad Firoz Al Ferdous said there was no scope for deception and that the ministry would take action against those found responsible. However, the authorities have yet to publicly explain the specific grounds for the transfers or clarify whether the decisions were disciplinary measures.

The Class Six ICT textbook’s chapter “Data and Information” used four illustrations to represent a knowledge pyramid: a pie chart for data, a network-like image for information, a brain for knowledge and a weighing scale for wisdom. The scale drew criticism because it resembles Jamaat-e-Islami’s recognised electoral symbol. No publicly available evidence, however, establishes that the image was chosen for political purposes.

The illustration’s history has added to the questions over editorial review. In the 2025 edition, “wisdom” was translated into Bangla as buddhi, meaning intelligence, and illustrated with a weighing scale. The icon was replaced with a brain in the 2026 edition. For the 2027 edition, buddhi was reportedly recommended to be replaced with pragya, meaning wisdom, but the scale reappeared in the final version. An order to halt printing was issued on the night of October 22.

A separate controversy has emerged over a boat (nouka) illustration in a primary-level Bangla textbook. The boat is also a recognised electoral symbol, associated with the Awami League. Some officials have claimed that a similar illustration appeared in earlier editions and that they received no instructions to change it. Those claims also require independent verification, and the authorities have yet to clarify the context in which the image was selected and approved. The two cases highlight the need to distinguish educational illustrations from their political associations while ensuring consistent editorial scrutiny.

They also raise questions about why potentially contentious images passed through the approval process and whether administrative action is being guided by verified responsibility.