A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum unt

[AshwiniKale]

Education is one of the most important pillars of the nation’s development. Education is a weapon which can change the world. Primary education is the base for the students. So a country should have a very good curriculum for the students in their Primary school study. A curriculum, which will make each student withstand the future competition and will lead to country’s development. So if a nation have the same national curriculum it would be beneficial in so many perspectives.

If a nation have same national curriculum then it would be easy for government to construct a nationwide program to train teachers. It would be easy to evaluate students on the same basis. Same national curriculum will decrease the efforts to construct the region wide education course in country. In India we have Central Board and State Board. Central board is followed by some states, while all other states follow a separate State board program. Each state has its own Program of primary education including different evaluation system, marking system and subjects to study. This requires a big management to maintain the track. So same national curriculum will cut down these efforts and can make use of these efforts in improving the education system.

This approach would be beneficial for the students in terms of options available. The same curriculum will open the doors of all the colleges and courses available there nationwide. Students will have a healthy competition environment. Students can study variety of courses and will be able to go in desired college. In the current system of a student wants to go in any other college belong to other state then he has to give an entrance examination and it differs according to the course he wants to study. But if this approach get followed by the nation then it would be easy for a student to get this rid of this. A student can follow his heart and make his dreams true.

It would be propitious for them who have to frequently transfer their locations because of their service such as in military services, government services etc. Currently it is very difficult for their children’s to accommodate in new environment, especially school and its curriculum. For example in India If a student belonging to Maharashtra went to study in Chennai then it would be difficult for him to get into routine. He has to start again in new way in the new environment. But if the curriculum would be same at national level till college then it would be easy for them to continue their study without any difficulty.

But though this approach is good enough, it may create some problems while implementing it at national level. Like to change the established system and to implement the new on nationwide would take significant amount of time and efforts. Students in the middle of the primary education may find it somewhat difficult to get adjust to new curriculum. As students would be having more options to choose then it might lead to confusion while making choice. Those students who don’t want to leave their native place or state then it would be difficult for them. For example if a student don’t get admission I any college residing at his place then that student might have to go another place.

But overall this approach is beneficial enough to implement. Though it would require some efforts and time once get implemented it would be best.

[AshwiniKale]

Thanks Summer111...:) for suggestion

[testtaker39]

I have just written an essay on the same issue. And honestly, I like your essay more than mine. It is more compact and has more points and explanations. To be true, after I have completed writing my essay, I thought with regret that if I might agreed with the claim I could have written better!

[moveslikejager]

Hi,

 

First off, it would have been nice to see a bit of discussion on the merits of the counterargument. For instance, how variety in education can better suit students with different career aspirations. It is always nice to know that the writer is objective and demonstrates that he has analyzed the issues from other perspectives and anticipate counter-arguments though you do touch on the cons of your own position.

 

Next, word choice could be enhanced. For instance, " So if a nation have the same national curriculum it would be beneficial in so many perspectives." The usage of the first 'so' should be amended to a more appropriate word choice, such as 'therefore', 'thus', 'hence', or "as such". Further, the word 'perspectives' should be amended to convey "in many ways". Therefore, it might be more appropriate to replace 'perspectives' with 'respects' or 'regards'. In addition, the second 'so' should be omitted. Usually it's best not to use words like 'very' or 'so many'; rather, you can use 'numerous' or 'several'. The original phrase could look something like this, though this is certainly not the only or best way to formulate this sentence:

 

"Hence, if a nation has (rather than have) the same national curriculum, it will be (corrected tense) beneficial to its prosperity in several respects."

 

Lastly, content-wise, I have some advice. The beginning of the essay starts out well, as it addresses why education is essential for a society. It would be nice to have included international competition as well as . The standardization argument is probably the most persuasive portion content-wise. Also, supporting examples were also great. It's very important to draw examples from outside knowledge Good Job! However, the conclusion, is non-existent. Perhaps you ran out of time? The content of your last paragraph is difficult to understand. A simple and concise conclusion of your overall analysis would have been an effective closing.

 

I would grade this paper in the ballpark of 3-4. More precisely, a 3.5.

Don't take my word for it on the score per se; the critique and suggestions are what matter most.

Good Start :)

[utkarsh3010]

If every student studies the same national curriculum until they enter college, then it would greatly affect both student's upbringing and the society as a whole. One should remeber that people are divided on the basis of caste, sex, region, religion, and many other aspects. I condemn this praposal of same national curriculum for all because of the following reasons.

 

 

Firstly, If a national curriculum is same for all, then the cost of eductaion would be almost same for all too, as most of the teachers would need to have same expertise same as other teachers and hence would expect equal pay for all. A kid from poor family may not be able to afford such education. On the other hand, a school can follow its own curriculum or curriculum stated by the state, to provide good and low cost education.

 

 

Now, consider the case of disabled students, like children with dislexia, children who are blind, etc. It would be a disaster if same curriculum is followed for these children. For e.g. dislexic children wont be able to understand same course. They required special training and special curriculum is required which would cater to them. A blind kid needs education which helps him deal with day to day problems, like walking, understanding things by hands, and other aspects. Same curriculum would prove to be great disadvantage to them.

 

 

Also, a country can be divided on the basis of religion, caste, and language. Consider Tamil Nadu(T.N.) and Madhaya Pradesh(M.P.), two states of India, differing on the basis of caste and language. The state language of T.N. is Tamil where as for M.P. its Hindi. If T.M. students are taught only Hindi as per national curriculum then, they would be treated as outcaste and wont be able to converse and write their own mother tounge. Similar is the case for MP students if they are taught only Hindi. One sollution can be to teach both the language to the students of both the states, and whole India. But, India has 28 states, with more than 100 language being spoken. Every student can not possile learn all the language. So State wise curriculum is required.

 

 

So, all students of a country shouldn't be taught same curriculum. The curriculum should be designed on the basis on region, religion, language, and caste. It should help students to learn their mother language, get mixed up with their society and be different for disabled children who need special curriculum.

[sukriti]

Always leave a line after ending a paragraph

 

Overall a good essay

[sudeepdai]

I do not agree to the idea that a nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum intill they enter college. This is because students have varied interests and want to purse different careers. So all of them would require different background knowledge on their subjects that they shall be studying in college. Making them study the same national cirriculum would be forcing a student to study it.

 

 

For instance, in Nepal, students are not compelled to study the same national curriculum until college. Each student is free to take up either the Nepal National Board or Cambridge A Levels. A levels course offers varied courses on ranging from Further Mathematics to French. This allows the students to choose their careers earlier and get a head start. The student grasp up the basics of the subject before college itself. This will not only keep the student motivated but also give him a fair open minded descision on his subject.

 

 

For example, a student who wants to study sports sciences in college would not really need a chemistry course till his education untill college. The student would have to waste time on subject matters he is not interested in. Let alone doing well, the student's passing would come into question and is it the student to be blamed or the curriculum board that forced the student to study what he/she is not interested in.Also, this would not motivate the student to his career opportunities and rather make him frivolous. He should be given a free choice on to which subject he wants to take up for further education and should be allowed to study those subjects from earlier classes as well.

 

 

Letting the students make choices from earlier on makes them bold for later as well. Giving them the freedom to choose from the subject matter from early on gives them the freedom of choosing from a various range of subjets by testing them beforehand. One would say that students would be naive and wouldnt be able to choose their career during such an early age, but that would be undermining the potential of the best ones out there as well.

 

 

There have been many instances of students dropping out from colleges or universities because they were forced to study materials they didnt want to. Also many students get stuck up before high school unable to clear the subjects that they never opted to study. Thus it would not be a wise desicion for the nation to require all of its students to study the same national curriculum untill they enter college.