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 claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure

Should a nation require all students to study the same national curriculum until they enter the college? There is not simple answer on this question due to the fact that the implementation of the proposed policy may bring positive and negative aftermaths as well. Although I can see advantages of the proposal such as an equal opportunity for all students, I strongly believe that disadvantages of it will inevitably outweigh the advantages. Therefore, I disagree with the issue.

To begin with, probably, the most staring shortcoming of the policy is connected with the fact that all children are unique. In fact, although this idea is a cliché, it does not change the fact that students have different potential, interests, level of health, ability to learn and absorb information; moreover, some children are more prone to math or other precise sciences, when other students are inclined to humanitarian sciences such as history or literature; additionally to it, some of students are gifted and have great potential which ought to be properly developed. Unfortunately, the fulfillment of the policy will lead to unreasonable unification of all children to a statistical standard. In this novel system there is no room for genius or children with deviations in learning abilities owing to the fact that the same national curriculum assumes all students will be taught the same material with the same textbook and estimated by the same standard.

Furthermore, the implementation of the policy has the second grave shortage which undermines program's usefulness because it tends to pay no attention to local traditions or confession. To illustrate an idea, we may take a look at the United states of America, the country consists of many states which have their regional history, customs and even languages and the realization of the policy will erase these unique features from the curriculum, for example, many of children who live in the Southern States speak in Spanish, perhaps, they should have an opportunity to be taught on this language; at the same time, students who live in norther states where a relatively small percentage of people who use Spanish ought to learn subjects in English. Therefore, the fulfillment of the policy gives no room for adapting the program for local needs.

Of course, the policy has some merits as well. Perhaps, the most serious one is that all children will have equal opportunity to acquire knowledge. Theoretically, a child from a removed village which is located in Taxes will be taught the same material as a student who lives in Los Angeles. Although this advantage seems to be significant, in reality, it is has some problems, for instance, the material base of schools as well as teachers' qualification will not be the same through the country and thus this benefit is rather good-wish than a real prospect. At the same time, disadvantages are real and almost inescapable. Hence, I oppose to the implementation of the policy.

In conclusion, perhaps, the main merit of the policy is that it is based on egalitarian ideas, unfortunately, this merit unavoidably leads to the most grave drawback that all children will be measured by the same averaged standard when there is no room for being different. Therefore, the implementation of the policy seems to be unreasonable.