GRE Issue Topic 90

Sample 1:

A national curriculum would be ideal if every student in a country had the same body of knowledge and set of skills upon graduation from high school. However, this is only possible if every student was the same as every other student. Some may argue that a ready–to–use curriculum would save individual school districts and teachers the time it takes to develop curriculum of their own. Others may point out the expense of purchasing text books and other materials needed to follow a national curriculum. In the case of the United States, there is continuous comparison between what American students achieve and what students in other industrial nations achieve. On the surface, the US does not compare favorably with many of those countries. A national curriculum may be the solution to that problem. However, each of the fifty states must be convinced to give up control over its own educational philosophy.

The logistics of creating a national curriculum in the United States is daunting. The US has the third largest population in the world, divided among fifty separately governed states. It was and continues to be a nation of immigrants. Those immigrants come from all over the world, bringing their languages and customs with them. Immigrants have a greater impact on some states than on others. Schools are challenged to educate children who can't even speak English. A national curriculum may be the straw that breaks the camel's back, educationally. Under ideal conditions, school districts would need considerable financial and technical support to adopt a national curriculum; added to other obstacles that already tax the abilities of some districts, a national curriculum could cause a mutiny.

A national curriculum would be likely to focus on the core areas of education: math, science, language arts, and social studies. One would be hard put to find someone who disagrees with the idea that all children of a country should have the same math skills, the same understanding of science, the same abilities to read and communicate effectively, and the same knowledge of history, geography, and government. However, many would also argue that there is great benefit in participating in the arts, knowing how to cook a meal or sew on a button, and being physically active. Others may hope their children learn the basics of a vocational trade such as carpentry, auto mechanics, or welding. The implementation of a national curriculum necessitates that some subjects fall to the wayside, preventing students from encountering fields that they may need, either to develop necessary career skills for the future or for their own personal interests.

Two compromises come to mind. The first entails requiring a national curriculum through grade eight. From kindergarten through middle school, all teachers would adhere to a national curriculum. These are the grades in which students learn the fundamentals of reading, writing, math, and social studies. Every student would be well–prepared for high school, where teachers develop a curriculum that encourages students to further develop the skills they learned in the lower grades. The four years of high school would focus on the core areas but allow students the time to explore other areas of interest. The second compromise consists of a set of guidelines or standards that enumerate the skills and knowledge that every student must be able to demonstrate with proficiency before graduating from high school. Every teacher would know what his or her students must be able to do or understand and use instructional strategies and materials to make that possible.

A nation’s desire to promote the educational wellbeing of its children is laudable and, perhaps, necessary. However, it does not necessitate the implementation of a national curriculum and doing so would be a disservice to its people. In order to foster creativity and individuality, the means to accomplish this should be left to the practitioners who also have the best interests of children at heart.

Sample 2:

The children of a nation are its future. Along with becoming independent and successful, they are the ones to carry the responsibility of running the nation as well as developing it in the future. Therefore, it is very important to form a strong base in their formative years so that they are not only successful in the personal front but also turn out to be good citizens. Education plays an important role in forming the basis of a child’s future. The curriculum should therefore be carefully chosen to fulfill these requirements. I believe that the curriculum being followed in a nation should be similar but schools should have some freedom to introduce or change it to a certain extent. While the larger part of the curriculum should be decided to remain similar on a national level, it should not be binding schools completely to follow it strictly.

Having a uniform curriculum is beneficial in many ways. It determines a standard level which is required by every student to clear before he is able to take another academic step. Each level prepares the student for the next level and this forms a stepwise format of learning. A common curriculum ensures a stable and universal learning pattern. It allows making the curriculum familiar throughout the nation and it becomes easier to refer to it. There are many students who attend more than one school during their education. A common national curriculum is very important for such students who leave one school and join another at a different place. For example, consider the people in a transferable job like the defense. The children of a defense person have to go to different places along with their families. It is evident that they need to change their schools as often as their guardians get transferred to a new place. If there are no guidelines for curriculum given to schools, these children will have to face new and unfamiliar curriculums everywhere they go. This will make it difficult for them to cope up with the requirements of a new curriculum and they will be at a great disadvantage. According to me, a uniform curriculum at all places makes it easier for such people to change schools and adjust in a new environment without hampering their growth.

Today is the age of competition. In order to find a place anywhere the students need to compete with each other. Therefore, uniformity is required at some level so that there is fair competition. Generally, students have to face an entrance test at the college level to secure a seat. This entrance test is based on the knowledge acquired by students in their high schools. If there is variation in the curriculum that they have studied, the entrance test will not be made on similar lines for everyone. Hence, it would benefit some students who have studied that curriculum and the other students would be at a loss. There would be no way to judge their capabilities with the same parameters. Hence, it is very important that uniformity be maintained in the curriculum at the school level, and students be able to face fair competition when they leave school.

However, I maintain that along with following the national guidelines for curriculum, schools should have certain liberty in choosing the format of courses it offers. Each student is different and so are his abilities. While there are some students who are fast learners, some are average and some are extremely slow. Moreover, the interests of students vary. Keeping in mind the interests of students, the curriculum should be molded so that they retain their interest in studies altogether. Hence, schools should be allowed a certain amount of discretion in making certain changes according to the needs only for the betterment of all the students.

In the end I would I like to conclude that a uniform pattern on the whole is very important at a national level. However, at the same time, schools should not be bound to follow it blindly and should be able to make certain changes that help the students in their studies.