A book that tells the truth about martial law and never asks what you think of it
KP's Pakistan Studies 10 narrates the 1970 election, the East Pakistan deadlock, the imposition of martial law, nationalisation, Islamisation and the Afghan Jihad — and contains zero evaluation verbs and zero open-opinion prompts in the entire volume. Its learning outcomes are Explain, Discuss, Identify, Comprehend and Analyse; its assessment is recall of dates. Content analysis would score this book as relatively open. Assessment analysis scores it closed.
The content is remarkably frank. KP's Pakistan Studies 10 narrates the 1970 election, the East Pakistan deadlock, the imposition of martial law, nationalisation, Islamisation and the Afghan Jihad — material several boards decline to touch. Then look at what it asks. Zero evaluation verbs and zero open-opinion prompts in the entire volume; learning outcomes are Explain, Discuss, Identify, Comprehend and Analyse (p. 7); and the assessment is date recall — “When was the nationalization of industries announced? A. 2th January 1972 B. 12th January 1972…” (p. 42). Analyse the content and this book scores open. Analyse the demand and it scores closed. It is the sharpest instance in the corpus of the gap between what a book makes available and what it requires.
“When was the nationalization of industries announced? A. 2th January 1972 B. 12th January 1972 C. 16th January 1972 D. 20th January 1972”
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan Studies 10, 2022-23 edition — PDF p. 7
What was checked and not found
A claim that one board does something and the others do not is only as
good as the search that failed to find it elsewhere. These are those searches.
Zero evaluation verbs and zero open-opinion prompts in the entire volume. Its learning outcomes are Explain, Discuss, Identify, Comprehend, Analyse (PAGE 7), and its assessment is date recall: "When was the nationalization of industries announced? A. 2th January 1972 B. 12th January 1972…" (PAGE 42). A4 = 3 rather than 5 because the content is politically frank: it narrates the 1970 election with "In East Pakistan the Awami League carried the day while Pakistan People's Party won in West Pakistan. Differences emerged between the two parties" (PAGE 8), and calls the 1973 document "a constitution based on federal and parliamentary principles" (PAGE 13).
Against this
The same volume calls the 1973 document “a new constitution based on federal and parliamentary principles… For the first time in the country's history a bicameral” legislature (p. 13), and states plainly that in 1970 “the Awami League carried the day” in East Pakistan while the PPP won in the West (p. 8). The information is genuinely there; only the demand to judge it is missing.
Limits
This is the sharpest instance in the corpus of the divergence between what a book makes available and what it requires. It is the pattern the project's psychological analysis predicts should leave KP leavers factually well-informed and attitudinally unchanged.
Boards and confidence
Khyber Pakhtunkhwahigh confidence
Confidence reflects the evidence tier this rests on. High means native or
English-medium text verified by exact string match; medium means it depends partly on
Urdu-medium material read at theme grade, or on an absence. See the method.
Source
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan Studies 10, 2022-23 edition — PDF p. 7
The date-recall item quoted is at PDF p. 42.
Cite this finding
Textbook Evidence Project, “A book that tells the truth about martial law and never asks what you think of it”. Evidence from 1 textbook (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa). Corpus version 210 records. Retrieved from https://textbookevidence.com/findings/kp-ps10-availability-without-demand/
Two citations are appropriate here, not one. The line above cites this
finding. If you are quoting the textbook passage itself, cite the book — its full
bibliographic record, edition and approval reference is on its own page, linked from each
evidence entry above — and say that you found it here.
Challenge this finding
This is a claim about a printed book, so it is checkable, and it should be
checked. If the citation is wrong, the edition is misidentified, the passage is quoted
unfairly, or the finding does not survive its own evidence, that is worth reporting and it
will be acted on whether or not the correction is convenient for the argument. Corrections
are logged publicly in the corrections log; this applies
fully to the boards themselves.
