GRE Issue 6 A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for t

It seems quite fair to provide a national curriculum for all children before the entrance of college instead of allowing school in different regions freedom to formulate their own curriculums. I agree some common core curriculum would serve useful purposes for any nation, but at the same time, individual regions and parents should have some freedom to augment any such curriculum as they see fit; otherwise, a nation's educational system might defeat its own purposes in the long term.

A national core curriculum would be beneficial to a nation in some respects. First of all, by proving all children with fundamental skills and knowledge, a common core curriculum would help ensure that our children grow up to become reasonably informed, productive members of society. In addition, a core curriculum would ensure that all school-children are taught core values upon which any democratic society depends to thrive, and even moral values such as tolerance of others with different viewpoints, and respect for others. Finally, a common core curriculum would provide a predictable foundation upon which college faculty could more easily build curricula and select course materials for freshmen that are neither below nor above their level of educational experience.

However, a common curriculum may pose certain problems. which might outweigh the benefits, discussed above.

First of all, on what basis would certain course work be included or excluded, and who would be the final decision- maker? In all likelihood these decisions would be in the hands of country’s education authority, in my country, it’s the Ministry of Education, who are likely to have their own preference of what should and should not be taught to children, which may not reflect those of most communities, schools, or parents.

What’s more, the inflexible nature of a uniform national curriculum would preclude the inclusion of programs, courses and materials that are primarily of regional or local significance. For example, the Southwestern Region of China requires children at certain grade levels to learn the regional culture and traditions. A national curriculum might not allow for this feature, and the children there would be worse off as a result of their ignorance about the traditions, values.

Last but not the least, it seems that imposing a uniform national curriculum would serve to underrate the difference between different children. As we see, some children are good at art and some children are excellent at math. While the national curriculum is given at the average level and cannot meet the specific requests of those children, their talents may deteriorate and enthusiasm may flag. What a big lost to the children and the whole society. But if their parents choose special class except the core curriculum for their children, these kids may get full development in their special talents. And now the dilemma situation is that the children spend too much time on the core class while have few energy learning other classes.

In the final analysis, unify of elementary and secondary education would amount to a double-edged sword. While it would serve as an insurance policy against a future populated with illiterates, at the same time it might serve to obliterate cultural diversity and tradition. The optimal approach, in my perspective, is a balanced one that imposes a basic curriculum yet leaves the rest up to each region or better to each child.