The Nigerian Publishers Association (NPA) has strongly opposed the Federal Ministry of Education’s newly announced Textbook Ranking Policy, describing it as unconstitutional, anti-competitive, commercially driven, and potentially harmful to Nigeria’s education system.

At a press conference addressed by the leadership of the Association, which represents over 200 structured publishing firms across the country, the NPA called for the immediate withdrawal of the policy and urged the Federal Government to embrace broader stakeholder consultations before proceeding with implementation.

The controversy began on April 27, 2026, when the Federal Ministry of Education, through the Nigerian Educational Research and Development Council (NERDC), announced a new policy framework aimed at standardising textbook selection and improving learning outcomes in Nigerian schools.

While the ministry presented the initiative as a strategy to ensure learners have access to accurate, relevant and affordable educational materials, publishers contend that the policy’s core provision—a ranking system for textbooks—poses serious risks to educational development, industry sustainability, and constitutional governance.

According to the NPA, it publicly rejected the proposal on April 28 and subsequently received a letter from NERDC on May 1 indicating that the agency had been directed to engage stakeholders on the policy. Another formal invitation followed on May 29, requesting the Association’s participation in a stakeholders’ meeting held on June 2 at NERDC headquarters in Sheda, Abuja.

The publishers said they attended the meeting in good faith, hoping meaningful consultations would lead to adjustments in the proposed framework. However, they were surprised to discover that implementation plans had already been concluded and were scheduled to commence immediately.
During the engagement, NERDC reportedly explained that publishers would first submit textbooks for assessment after paying prescribed evaluation fees. Books scoring at least 70 percent would proceed to a second stage, which would involve additional payments and a final ranking exercise.

The NPA said this revelation reinforced concerns that the process had effectively been predetermined before stakeholder consultations took place.

Presenting its objections, the Association argued that Nigeria already possesses an established textbook evaluation system that has operated transparently over the years. Rather than introducing a ranking framework, the publishers maintained that existing evaluation mechanisms should be strengthened and improved where necessary.

The Association further argued that the ranking model appears to have been borrowed from countries whose educational realities are vastly different from Nigeria’s.
According to the publishers, many of the countries operating similar systems have fewer than one million students, less than ten active educational publishers, and populations smaller than some individual Nigerian states. Nigeria, by contrast, has an estimated 60 million students, more than 200 active educational publishers, and a population exceeding 220 million.

The NPA questioned the practicality of restricting approved educational materials to a handful of highly ranked titles in a country of such size and complexity.
The Association also warned that ranking textbooks would inevitably create winners and losers within the industry, concentrating opportunities among a small number of publishers while pushing many others toward financial distress.

According to the publishers, a system where only a limited number of books are officially preferred could result in business closures, loss of investment, reduced innovation, and widespread unemployment across the publishing value chain.

Another major concern raised was the timing of the policy. The publishers noted that the education sector is still adjusting to the implementation of a new national curriculum introduced less than a year ago.

They argued that many curriculum guidelines are still being released while some subject curricula remain unavailable, making it difficult for publishers to complete the development and revision of learning materials.

The NPA therefore described the introduction of a ranking framework at this stage as unfair and disruptive.

The Association also warned of a potential nationwide shortage of textbooks if the policy is implemented according to the announced timelines.

It argued that no single publisher — or even a small group of publishers — would be capable of meeting Nigeria’s enormous textbook demand within a short period, especially given the country’s millions of students spread across public and private schools.
Beyond operational concerns, the publishers questioned the constitutional basis of the policy.

They noted that education falls under the Concurrent Legislative List of the 1999 Constitution, raising questions about whether the Federal Ministry of Education possesses the authority to determine textbook choices for state governments.
The Association asked whether adequate consultation had been conducted with state authorities and whether a centralised textbook adoption framework could undermine constitutional powers vested in states.

Perhaps the strongest criticism came over the financial structure attached to the proposed policy.

The NPA accused the Federal Ministry of Education and NERDC of turning the initiative into a revenue-generating venture under the guise of educational reform.
According to the Association, publishers would be required to pay ₦2,000 per page for textbook assessment and ₦1 million per subject for ranking.

Using curriculum projections, the publishers estimated that a company seeking approval across all subjects would spend approximately ₦47.57 million on assessments alone and an additional ₦88 million on ranking fees, bringing the total cost to about ₦135.57 million.

The Association argued that such costs directly contradict the ministry’s stated objective of making textbooks more affordable for Nigerian families.

The publishers questioned how imposing such significant charges on content developers could result in lower prices for students and parents, insisting that the policy appears designed for “the highest bidder” rather than educational quality.
Despite its criticism, the NPA insisted it supports genuine educational reforms aimed at improving standards, accountability, and quality assurance.

As alternatives, the Association proposed that NERDC establish clear and measurable quality benchmarks for textbooks while maintaining a non-ranking approval process.
Under its proposal, all books that meet prescribed standards should be recommended for use, with NERDC publishing approved lists showing the subject, title, author, and publisher rather than placing books in competitive rankings.

The Association said such an approach would preserve quality control while protecting competition, innovation, accessibility, and consumer choice.

Expressing concern over what it described as the ministry’s “unusual urgency” in implementing successive reforms, the NPA noted that educational systems around the world typically allow transition periods of two to three years when introducing major curriculum changes.

The publishers argued that Nigeria’s experience has been markedly different, with curriculum implementation commencing even before full curriculum documents became available.

The Association therefore called on the Federal Ministry of Education, NERDC, state governments, school proprietors, parents, teachers, booksellers, authors, and other stakeholders to collectively review the policy before its implementation causes what it termed “irreversible damage” to the education sector.

Reaffirming its commitment to quality education, the NPA concluded that Nigeria deserves reforms that are transparent, inclusive, practical, and tailored to the country’s unique realities rather than imported policy models that could undermine competition and educational access.