about national curriculum

631 Words3 Pages
As we turn to the advice the author offered, we have to question that why should the nation require all its students to have the same curriculum, that is to say, the reason of doing so. The author is, however, too extreme of it. My recommendation is a basic core curriculum with augmented courses determined by the school itself. Offering the national curriculum has its advantages. At first, if there do exist national curriculum, most of them would be basic courses like literature, science and mathematics to meet different people's needs. As the children before entering the college might be unable to digest and decide what their interests are and which field they should be in, the national curriculum, which might includes comprehensive education, providing a stage for the students to be exposed of the world. Meanwhile, letting the schools to make decision about their own courses might be influenced by the proportion proporation of students entering schools of a higher grade or the employment rate for the vocational school. Thus, the process of imparting the national curriculum helps to enhance the national cohesion and eliminate the huge gap between schools. Also, it is easier for the administrators of the colleges and universities to select students for they have the same level of educational experience. The No Child Left Behind Act which was advocated to provide a equality of opportunities for all the children in the nation is essentially a national curriculum. It takes effect when some low-quality schools were detected and closed then. Admittedly, the national curriculum seems appealing to us for the reasons below. But in a society which pursues individuality rather than generality, shall we just accept the exclusive nation curriculum? The answer is obvious. The different courses of each school vary/diversify varietify them from each other reflect their
Open Document