OK... I've got a problem. I'm reviewing the Africa content for a new World History text by a Major Publisher Who Shall Remain Nameless. It is targeted at a secondary school audience.

Here's the problem. It's terrible. It's often flat out wrong. It's mired in misinformation on a host of levels. The periodization is a total mishmash. The writing is REALLY bad. The main source of information appears to be the on-line edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica.

So, fine, I'm going to spend A LOT of time correcting this stuff, and I'm trying hard not to be too mean in my manuscript comments. But I'm at a loss to understand how somebody can be hired to write something this important and do such a mind-bogglingly bad job. I have a hard time even believing that this person is a trained historian, as most of the material reads like a bad term paper that was cranked out at the last minute by an unmotivated college sophmore.

And it's not just the Africa content... there's stuff attached on India, Asia, and the Middle East, and it's every bit as bad.

So, help me out here.
Does anybody out there know how secondary textbooks get written?? I'd love to gain some insight into who writes them and how much time goes into them.