issue5 V6站队 8.11

zehuaUID: 199246

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 course to offer.
－－－－－－－－－－－－－
Should a nation require all of its students study the same national curriculum? In my view, although studying the same curriculum would help inter-culture communicate and modernization of the whole country, such effort may not be practical. In addition, such effort means to force minority give up their own choice of study, which may exacerbate culture conflicts.

It might seem tempting to agree with the speaker, on the basis that studying the same curriculum would help unification of a whole nation, especially a multi-culture nation.
With all of the schools teaching the same courses, students in different cultures and peoples would easily communicate, because they do not have language barriers, and more importantly, they have the same interests and same topic to discuss. While different cultures are the insulated islands spread in the sea, national curriculum is the bridge crossing the water. Only with a bridge can two isolated islands be linked together. Similarly, only a national curriculum could unite a nation and help every people and culture benefit from modernization of economy. Without such a curriculum, it is possible that the economical growth of a nation would be overgrown in certain parts where residents of majority live, while remote areas with residents of minority may remain undeveloped. In that event, people of minority would be dissatisfied with national government and be place under the threat of civil war and dissociation.

However, the foci would be too narrow if we over-emphasize on the benefits of national curriculum, while ignoring the practicality and negative effects. Conditions of schools in different parts of the nation vary. It would possibly be difficult to extend national curriculum to every parts of the nation. For a multi-culture nation, each people speak different languages, and economic conditions vary as well. If such a nation attempts to popularize standard language in every people and every culture, there may actually be no teacher teaching such courses in the remote areas. Furthermore, imposing a national curriculum means to sacrifice the characteristics of minority cultures, which would incur antipathy of other people, and cause intense culture conflicts. Therefore, it would be unwise to impose a national curriculum to all parts of the nation.

On balance, what is the best solution for a multi-culture nation to both take the advantage of a national curriculum, and also avoid the negative effects? In my opinion, the best solution is to design a core national curriculum for every school of the nation to teach, while at the same time give each school free choice to add other courses they need, suit their particular conditions and what is more important, show respect to their unique cultures. In this way, all peoples of a nation would have benefit from common language and common knowledge for economic growth, and also preserve the unique cultures of each people. To better govern a multi-culture nation, the peoples need toleration, mutual understanding and respect to each other. Only in this way can the nation become prosperous.

In the final analysis, the speaker's statement is partly true. A national curriculum would have merit regarding modernization and economic growth. However, it would unnecessarily incur culture conflicts to the extent that such actions impose minority to give up their own culture. A core curriculum along with additional courses tailored to each people's particular needs is the best choice.

zehuaUID: 199246

顶