A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.
Essay(did in 70 minutes):
Different nations adopt different policies on whether to require students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. Despite the coexistence of two kinds of pre-college education, a curriculum designed individually to suit the need of every student can serve the purpose of education better.
Admittedly, there are some knowledge and technique that must be taught to every student. Every kid need to learn to do basic algebra and to read and write in their native language. They also need to be taught the history and the current situation of the world they live in. However, these knowledge and technique don’t have to be taught in a standardlized way. Educational resource are different among different schools, and students’ situations vary. Maybe it’s better to let each state have its own teaching plan of history. And maybe it’s a good idea to give math teachers the freedom to choose the textbook that they think suit best. There are different approaches to teach students the basic that must be covered, and educators need to have the freedom to choose the best one.
What’s more, every student differs from another. They have various talents and interests. To put them under the same curriculum is to put the maker of the standard into a dilemma. Should every student take all kinds of lessons to make sure they can be fully developed in every aspect? Does every student need to know quantum theory and lingua latina and be able to play violin or piano and run for 5 km in 25 minutes? Or should the curriculum only cover the basic? Leave Newton and Mozart untaught because we can’t make sure everyone is interested in them? Either of the choice entail the risk of putting students under too heavy a burden which is unnecessary or precluding help to talented and interested young men and women who are eager to learn more.
In an ideal world, we will teach every one in a unique way that suit him best. However, in the real world, it is always the case that educational resources of a nation is very limited. In these situations, a nationwide standard curriculum might be an expedient solution, for it makes the training of teachers easier and lower the educational cost to the public. However, people need to remember the solution is only expedient and to serve the current urgent need. And when the situation of the country get better, the education need to be reformed, and the trandition of the nationwide standardized education should not stand in the way.
In some countries such as China, South Korea and Japan, young people still receive nationwide standardized education despite the development each country have respectively got. Middle school students learn the same courses and take the same exams and get a total score to be determined which university they can be admitted in. There is a hierarchy of universities, and the success or fail of a student depends mainly on what university he finally got in. Students’ learning are test-oriented, they develop a technique of apparant learning which help them get high scores. Education serve to differentiate people into ranks instead of making the most of the potential of the youth. Surely this is a tragedy, one that reminds us that education can easily divagate had educators not keep the purpose of education in mind: we respect the individuality of every student and hope all them find their best way to grow up.
I’m not a native user of English, so I don’t feel comfortable with it when responding to the topics. It’s really hard to speed up, for I have to fiddle with my words for a long time and still can’t get myself correctly expressed. And it’s really easy to get lost during the process. Don’t know how to get out of this problem, need desperately for some advice. Thanks!