“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 the positio

Students taught the same national curriculum until they enter college would prove overwhelming hindering to both the students success the nation's progress and advancement.

A national curriculum entails specific subject matter and teaching methods to ensure that all students receive and equal learning experience. However, a uniform curriculum taught across a nation will not cater to the students' specific abilities, tackle each student's weaknesse, and challenge each student's strengths. For example, a national curriculum may dictate that certain mathematics are taught at particular grade levels. If all 8th grade students must take Trigonometry, then this greatly curtails the advancement of students strong in mathematics who may be at the pre-calculus level by 8th grade. On the other hand, students who may struggle in mathematics may not be retaining and comprehending the reuired trigonometry curriculum, which may lead to them being held back an academic year even if they excel at other subjects such as the social sciences or sciences. This does not challenge advanced students to attain their true potential in particular subject matters, and also harms struggling students by pushing them past their abilities in a subject they are weak in. An adaptive curriculum would consistently challenge students, whether they are adept or struggling at a certain subject. This would push students to focus on the materials that pertain to their level of comprehension, while also pushing them at their own rate of educational progression. Such a curriculum would more wholely improve student success in their pre-college years by ensuring that each student progresses to their potential by the time they are old enough to decide on their specializations and careers.

A national curriculum forces uniformity in both academic subject matter and teaching methodologies and is ultimately not structured around individual student capabilities. If an adaptive curriculum were to be implemented, rather than the same national curriculum, the way the curriculum is taught, as well as the rentention and progress attained by the students, would be greatly improved. Students learn a variety of different ways, with some students retaining more from auditory learning while others benefit from hand-on teaching. An adaptive curriculum can cater to certain teaching styles, thus allowing students to be grouped into their particular teaching preferences, improving both the learning and teaching experience. Likewise, such groupings can lead to a more efficient educational program by pushing students to progress in their pre-college education to the point where they are competent enough for mre advanced subject matter. Their learning styles will become habitual by the time they enter their college education, and thus they will be academically self-sufficient to a respectable degree, allowing them to excel at the collegiate level.

National curriculums may also entail uniformity in the subject material taught to pre-collegiate students. This prevents students from diving deeper into particular subject matters they are interested in and also hinders the ability for the education system to prepare the youth for a workforce dependent on broad education. In this day and age, different countries approach their educational systems different, and this ultimately reflects on the countries technical progress and economic development, The United States, for examples, has shifted from a manufacture based economy to a service based eceonomy. The workforce for each of these types of marketplaces vary significantly, with a service based economy relying more heavily on a larger body of educated individuals, while a manufacture based economy relies a select group of technically innovative and specialized individuals and a larger labor force. The latter reflects more of the Chinese economy. These different economies have varying technical requirements to progress the nation and improve each individuals standard of living. A national curriculum may focus on just how to cater to each of these specific economy types, but that limits the nation to never progress further than the curriculum allows. On the contrary, an adaptive and varying national curriculum can push inidividuals to pursue their passions and interests and ultimately reach their full potential. This will ultimately prove beneficial to the nation as a whole, both technicially and economically.

To conclude, a national curriculum has many downfalls while an adaptive curriculum could prove more