issue5 第一篇：求拍;-)

crossbowUID: 2689120

[第一篇，写了四小时-_-!]

题目：
A nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college rather than allow schools in different parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer.

主题：教学大纲对学生发展至关重要。统一大纲有诸多好处。但是如果不考虑学校和学生实际情况，只追求形式上的统一，会造成僵化死板的教学大纲，从而限制甚至阻碍学生的发展。因此，教学大纲也要有一定的灵活性，使不同学校可以根据实际需要予以补充修改，但这种灵活性要建立统一教学大纲的基础上的。

正一：统一大纲，专家制定。科学系统，全面发展。若由地方，质量不一。贻害无穷。
正二：大纲设计，耗时耗力。沿用统一大纲，在全国范围内看，相当经济，不会给地方经济增加包袱。
正三：大纲统一，考核标准也可统一。便于学生考察。也便于对效果反馈，利于改进，进而提高。也利于大学录取。

反一：统一大纲，不许学校私自修订，无法满足学校切身需要。一来无法增补特色课程。如学校传统，难以发挥。如地域特色，无法充分利用。二来影响学生积极性，导致教学效果滑坡。
反二：修订统一大纲，会影响全国。需慎之又慎，试点而后推行。因此周期相当长。这会导致大纲与现实脱节。培养的学生知识结构老化，缺乏必备技能，思想落伍，无法跟紧科技发展，适应社会。

结尾：综上，统一不可，放任更不可。统一为本，适当增补，乃两全之策。

---8<---

Curricula play an important role in any school education, whether in elementary, secondary schools, or in higher education. Students in elementary and secondary schools are in their formative stages, and therefore curricula have much more significant impacts on them than on college students. The advantages of a national curriculum are evident.

However, it would be harmful to follow too strictly a national curriculum and not to adapt it for conditions of each school and student interests, since any single curriculum may fail to serve all needs of different students from various parts of the nation and even impede students' development.

Therefore, a curriculum should also be flexible so that it can be adjusted to better meet the needs under different situations, but such flexibility should base on a common national curriculum.
[30:00]


National curricula, which are usually designed by national-wide experts and scholars who are experienced in school education, are usually tested by most schools of the country, and are of high-quality, systematic, and well-balanced. Such curricula can promote all-round development of students and assure the quality of education. However, this would not be the case, if curricula development were put into the hands of local schools, where poorly-designed, or even imbalanced curricula may be produced, with much more emphasis placed on certain subjects than others. The imbalance in curricula will have negative effects on students' knowledge structures and skills.
[25:00]

Further, development of a curriculum involves much human efforts and is very costly. Such costs are often prohibitive for many schools which are short of budget, since at least a large percentage of the budget will be spent on curricula. This usually lay financial burdens on schools and affect their normal operations. Therefore, it would be a wise choice to use a national curriculum, which could save money for schools, and those savings can be used for better purposes, such as hiring good teachers and buying new lab facilities.
[18:00]

Another advantage of a national curriculum is that all students from the county will share a common ground in school education. This means that the evaluation of students' academic performance and capabilities can be standardized and become much simpler than that without a common curriculum. Schools can collect educational statistics and data more easily and compare them with those of other schools, find the differences and further improve the efficiency and quality of their instructions. Also, using the same curriculum in schools allows colleges and universities to gain a better understanding of the academic records of students from schools in different regions all over the county and to make more reasonable admission decisions.


On the other side, a national curriculum, if followed too strictly, could have negative influences on school education. One disadvantage is that, schools are not allowed for the flexibility to revise the curriculum by themselves to fit their needs. Considering the examples in many schools, whether private or public. They often have long-standing traditions, such as being famous for liberal arts, for science education, or even for robots and computer technologies. Without the permission to change the curriculum and add their own honored courses to it, students are deprived of the opportunity to learn both interesting subjects and useful skills. Moreover, too rigid a curriculum can not inspire or fulfill students' interests, and may cause distractions to students and result in falling instructional quality.

Actually, changes to a national curriculum are doable through revisions. However, because such revisions have wide impacts throughout the county, they are usually done with extreme cautions, and are tried extensively in pilot schools before they are accepted and put into national-wide use. It is such long a process from revision to widely use that a national curriculum may become out-stepped with needs and trends in real world. With the rapid progress in almost every area of sciences and technologies, an out-dated curriculum will be much worse for students today than ever. Students with narrow perspectives and without necessary skills will not be able to compete with their peers who are brought up studying up-to-date curricula, and can not be expected to solve complex and challenging problems with the limited skills they have.

In summary, a national curriculum is beneficial for it's many advantages, but too rigid a national curriculum would pose restrictions on school education and limit the full potential of students. Schools should be allowed to adapt a national curriculum to better meet their needs, but such adaptations should be done with caution to avoid undermine the balance and quality of the curriculum.
[40:00]


---END---