issue 6/14/96/116 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 position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
To improve the quality of pre-college education, it is often proposed that all students should be required to study the same national curriculum. I agree that adopting the same curriculum for schools across the nation would be helpful for students and teachers from less developed regions to get more support and for universities around the nations to evaluate applicants more objectively. Nevertheless, we need to be careful of the danger of the national government to advance its own political agenda through this national curriculum.
Through adopting a standardised national curriculum, it would be more feasible for schools in less developed regions to get support and help for improving their education. Since students from the disadvantaged school districts will be studying the same curriculum as those from schools bestowed with more resources, it is possible for the schools in the less developed regions to re-use lesson plans and other teaching materials developed elsewhere. In addition, it is more convenient for teachers across nations including those volunteers from Teach for America program to serve as temporary teachers in those disadvantaged schools as the same materials can be used under the national curriculum.
In addition, the national curriculum would be useful for universities to assess the applications from all over the nation more objectively. Currently, the college admission system relies on standardised tests such as SAT and ACT to assess students’ academic potential objectively. But such instruments are often criticised for creating extra workload and stress among the college bound students. With the same national curriculum, the university admission committees can use the GPAs of the applicants as a more accurate and comparable indicator to make admission decisions.
Despite the above two advantages of the proposed policy, we need to be cautious about the risk of the government imposing certain ideological agenda to the schools through requiring a national curriculum. Quality education should be provided for all students regardless of socioeconomic backgrounds to improve social mobility among the youths. But it should not be used as an institution for propagating the official ideology and values that serve to legitimise the national government. Therefore, if we are to adopt a national curriculum, we should do everything we can to make sure the curriculum is free from political bias or influence from the national government.
In conclusion, I agree that all students should be required to study the same national curriculum which can help the students from less developed regions to receive better education and the universities around the nation to make admission decisions more effectively. Nevertheless, it is important to remain vigilant against any political intervention of the national government when designing and implementing the national curriculum.