Issue5 我的第一篇 写了好久 欢迎拍砖

001122UID: 194035

Issue5

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.

The text:

I fundamentally agree with the author's contention that students should be required to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. However, there is no need to trivialize the significance of different regions in determining which academic courses to offer. In my opinion, the best way is to strike a balance between a nation and its different parts.

Firstly, introducing a national core curriculum in elementary and secondary school may have certain amount of positive effects. To begin with, it will ensure students assimilate the merits of traditional value-such as persistence in the face of adversity and respect for the viewpoints of others-which plays a considerable role in both their future and the entire nation. In addition, a unified curriculum will provide a predictable base upon which college administrations and faculties could more easily build curriculum and select course materials for freshman that are neither above nor above their level of education experience. Thus, allowing nation to determine curriculum would be beneficial in general.

Secondly, overemphasizing the role of a nation in determining curriculum would bring about a highly unified standard that to some extent undermines the nation's own originality. For example, in china, school systems are financed and regulated on the national level. This has allowed them to maintain a relatively uniform school environment in all regions, regardless of their respective values and economic conditions. The education system is also featured with highly competitive standardized examinations after high school, only by which permitting or denying access to higher education. Consequently, students pay exclusive attention to this examination rather than creativity and imagination. In short, we should not overemphasize the significance of nation.

Thirdly, allowing different regions to select courses they see fit would refrain from affecting and contradicting distinct cultural values and moral standards of certain groups. Common sense tells us that education plays a vital role in the development of cultural diversity. Take California for example, as is known for its diverse-cultural value, the local educators have built up different courses for different groups according to their cultural values, aiming to achieve a mutually understandable and respectable value system. In addition, apart from cultural diversity, there are also some kinds of feature such as economics and political conditions that distinguishes region from region. When building curriculums and regulating education systems, the educators should also take into account these differences.

In sum, a national curriculum would amount to a double-edged sword. While it would serve as a benefit to help students establish a traditional value system, at the same time it would be the killer of originality. On the other hand, without educators of local regions, different cultural value will conflict. In my point of view, the optimal method is a balanced one that imposes a basic curriculum yet leaves the rest up to the different regions.

(473)

乒乓球爱上九月UID: 162925

建议你先去别人的文章提提意见 找一个互改的?
这个互改一下吧 :
http://211.151.90.54/bbs/showthread.php?s=&threadid=249313

youyousaiUID: 193804

I fundamentally agree with the author's contention that students should be required to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. However, there is no need to trivialize the significance of different regions in determining which academic courses to offer. In my opinion, the best way is to [B]make[/B]  a balance between [B]the[/B] nation and its different parts.

Firstly, introducing a national core curriculum in elementary and secondary school may have certain amount of positive effects. [B]To begin with不明白用它干嘛？[/B] , it will ensure students assimilate the merits of traditional value.（觉得读着别扭，可以这么说吧:it helps to preserve and develop the the merits of traditional value）-such as persistence in the face of [B]enticement（改成诱惑比较好吧）[/B]  and respect for [U]the viewpoints of（去掉好了，直接尊重别人就好了）[/U]  others-which plays a considerable role in both their [B]personal[/B]future and the entire nation. In addition, a unified curriculum will provide a predictable [B]fundation[/B]  upon which college administrations and faculties could more easily build curriculum and select [B]related materials[/B]  for freshman that are neither above nor [B]below[/B]  their level of education experience. Thus, allowing nation to determine curriculum would be beneficial in general.

Secondly, [B]though it has many benefits[/B] , overemphasizing the role of a nation in determining curriculum would bring about a highly unified standard that to some extent undermines the nation's own originality. For example, in china, school systems are financed and regulated on the national level. This has allowed them to maintain a relatively uniform school environment in all regions, regardless of their respective values and economic conditions. The education system is also featured with highly competitive standardized examinations after high school, only by which permitting or denying access to higher education. Consequently, students pay exclusive attention to this examination rather than creativity and imagination. [B]And finally, the whole nation will lose its development motivity.[/B] In short, we should not overemphasize the significance of nation.

Thirdly, allowing different regions to select courses [B]fit to them[/B]  would refrain from affecting and contradicting distinct cultural values and moral standards of certain groups. Common sense tells us that education plays a vital role in the development of cultural diversity. Take California for example, as is known for its diverse-cultural value, the local educators have built up different courses for different groups according to their cultural values, aiming to achieve a mutually understandable and respectable value system. In addition, apart from cultural diversity, there are also some kinds of feature such as economics and political conditions that distinguishes region from region. When building curriculums and regulating education systems, the educators should also take into account [B]不知道要不要加of[/B] these differences.

In sum, a national curriculum would amount to a double-edged sword. While it would serve as a benefit to help students establish a traditional value system, at the same time it would be the killer of originality. On the other hand, without educators of local regions, different cultural value will conflict. In my point of view, the optimal method is a balanced one that imposes a basic curriculum yet leaves the rest up to the different regions.

总体感觉文章思路还比较清晰，但语言上面有点不太通，读着有点别扭。
太晚了，困了，明天想想我自己写这篇的话会有什么不同的思路。