issue 5 (prepare for 207--2)

LSDUID: 157855

5."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."
What kind of curriculum should be use, a core curriculum or give the right to different part of the nation to determine their students’ curriculum? According to the speaker’s assertion, core curriculum should be the better one. I agree that if the former one is choosing, we will have some benefits, however, certain problems should also be noted.

I concede that there will be certain positive respects if students learn core-curriculum before they enter college. Firstly, if students all learn the same course, it will be relatively easy for college teachers design their teaching plan for their students, for they have same knowledge background, teachers can know what the students have learn and what they still don't know. These can save a lot of time for both teachers and students. Secondly, since some basic knowledge and skill should be thought to each student no mater who he/she is, where he/she from, or what major he/she may choose in their further study, core-curriculum can promise it. It means that courses like teaching students critical thinking, reasoning, analyzing are necessary for each student's grow up.

However, if the whole nation's students study the same national curriculum, there will always be its disadvantages that cannot be avoid. The most important one is that which group of people should be collected to decide the content of the core-curriculum? Should it be the government officer or some schoolmaster with reputation or other people? I think it should not be the governors to take the responsibility, for they are not familiar with either students or teachers, and they also seem won't have such time for myriad immediate problem such as unemployment and violence problem are waiting for them to be solved. It also should not be the group of schoolmasters, I don't mean that they have no such ability, but they are from various districts and of different interests it will be so difficult even impossible for all of them get to an agreement. For the two reason and some others which maybe emerged if the statement above becomes true we can see that it will be fail to meet the needs of whole nation.

Now in reality, a large number of nations adopt the balancing way --that is their elementary school and middle school containing both the critical course taught in whole nation while adding curriculum that reflect the character of the distinct districts. It is a successful choice, for instance, in France; the special classes about engine in some districts have greatly boosted the level of the workers in the same area. One of the mayors once said that (I paraphrase): Education’s aim is to make the students function to the society and these special classes help education achieve its goal. From what he said, we can see that non-core curriculum can bring us benefit that core-curriculum never attain.

In sum, I hold that some basic knowledge should be taught though the same curriculum; meanwhile different areas can have different courses add to the main course to meet their special purpose.
本想限时完成，还是超了，请大家帮忙看看！

阿莱UID: 190806

5."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."

What kind of curriculum should be use, a core curriculum or give the right to different part of the nation to determine their students’ curriculum? According to the speaker’s assertion, core curriculum should be the better one. I agree that if the former one is choosing, we will have some benefits, however, certain problems should also be noted.

我个人感觉题目讨论的是应该还是不应该 或者是应该怎么做 这样一个问题 所以 你的这个论点就比较奇怪了 那么到底是should 还是 should not呢？仍然没有解决。而且还有语法错误 句式用的也不太好 according和i agree衔接生涩

I concede that there will be certain positive respects if students learn core-curriculum before they enter college. Firstly, if students all learn the same course, it will be relatively easy for college teachers design their teaching plan for their students, for they have same knowledge background, teachers can know what the students have learn and what they still don't know. These can save a lot of time for both teachers and students. Secondly, since some basic knowledge and skill should be thought to each student no mater who he/she is, where he/she from, or what major he/she may choose in their further study, core-curriculum can promise it. It means that courses like teaching students critical thinking, reasoning, analyzing are necessary for each student's grow up.

只看TS.用让步的手法说：有一定的好处。关于让步段的问题  讨论过 大部分同学还是认为写在后面比较好 作为补充

However, if the whole nation's students study the same national curriculum, there will always be its disadvantages that cannot be avoid.句子不好 要凝炼阿 The most important one is that which group of people should be collected to decide the content of the core-curriculum? Should it be the government officer or some schoolmaster with reputation or other people?（这里写的莫名其妙 不是写带来的缺点吗？怎么又提出了问题 然后自己再分析呢？意群混乱的说） I think it should not be the governors to take the responsibility, for they are not familiar with either students or teachers, and they also seem won't have such time for myriad immediate problem such as unemployment and violence problem are waiting for them to be solved. It also should not be the group of schoolmasters, I don't mean that they have no such ability, but they are from various districts and of different interests it will be so difficult even impossible for all of them get to an agreement. For the two reason and some others which maybe emerged if the statement above becomes true we can see that it will be fail to meet the needs of whole nation.
其实只需要举出几个单一化造成的后果就可以了 也可以做一些推论


Now in reality, a large number of nations adopt the balancing way --that is their elementary school and middle school containing both the critical course taught in whole nation while adding curriculum that reflect the character of the distinct districts. It is a successful choice, for instance, in France; the special classes about engine in some districts have greatly boosted the level of the workers in the same area. One of the mayors once said that (I paraphrase): Education’s aim is to make the students function to the society and these special classes help education achieve its goal. From what he said, we can see that non-core curriculum can bring us benefit that core-curriculum never attain.
这一段还是比较有分量 但是 最好在这段开头加一个明确的TS 说明你的观点是：这样的方式，怎么怎么样，是比较好的方式。然后说，很多国家采取的怎么怎么样

In sum, I hold that some basic knowledge should be taught though the same curriculum; meanwhile different areas can have different courses add to the main course to meet their special purpose.

还说得过去 既然你有明确的立场 就应该把你的body3的思想作为你的论点 放在开头段 这样才算是一篇完整的文章 加油吧！
:)

LSDUID: 157855

谢谢阿莱的评改，意见认真考虑中

lakeqianUID: 157560

正面观点第二点可以写的再多一些。这段列出了两点论据好像。。。怎么感觉上。。。像是写Argu啊？？

反驳的论点我个人很喜欢。（这也就是为什么市场经济优于计划经济的原因。可怜的中国人民解放那么久才慢慢明白。。。耽误好多年时间sigh）

balancing way ？还是balanced？我拿不准。

LSD要做头好牛啊！！

LSDUID: 157855

呵呵，谢谢楼上，以前的文章还有人看，很高兴的说:p