Search the Community

The statement: ""A nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college" My Response: The statement of requiring students of a nation to study a national curriculum until they enter college is in response to an maxamize the level of education a society develops. The theory behind this takes on an assumption far too broad to have a successful implentation as each nation varies accross the globe in multiple facets such as environments, resources available to students region dependent, and teacher expertise. In this retort to a national curriculum, we will use Japan as an example, as Japan has a national curriculum already in place. Japan is a country that is about the size of California, which is only 1 state out of 51 in the USA, hence it will act as only a sample size of what a national curriculum would mean in a geographically larger country such as the USA for example. Japan, as small as it is, contains a variety of ecosystems and variances in regional economic productivity which calls for a diverse educational model which is able to meet the needs of regions and specific populations. However, the national curriculum, is arguably failing it's country side and agricultural economics as students flock from rural communities into already dense and highly competitive technological and material hubs such as Tokyo, Osaka, and Sapporo. This is leading to a society in constant competition in the same labor markets where only the best will succeed as others dwindle economically and psychologically.A national curriculum meets only basic needs of a population with a lackluster potential of mediocrity. The national curriculum of Japan requires students whom live thousands of miles, multiple islands, and economies so different fron one another, to study the same topics and same theories day in and day out. The most northern island is Hokkaido which has an economy dominated by agricultural production whereas the main land of Honshu consists of international hubs such as Tokyo, Kyoto, and Osaka. The students in the agricultura land of Hokkaido would benefit from a greater focus on agricultural sciences as they are more likely to have job opportunities in this field. Whereas the students in the international hubs would greatly benefit through honing in on international economics, business, and culture. The rural student is at a disadvantage if they complete their high school education with a lack of knowledge in the immediate job opportunities of their area. The national curriculum takes away the time a student has to take apprenticeship to learn a local trade thus when it comes time to make the decision to become a contributing member to their local economy post-graduation, their skills are not up to par. This then creates a gap between the local economy and the labor force. The student then feels the best option is to move to the nearest metropolitan area and take their chances of success competing against students born in the metropolitan area who have had access and consistent interactions with said economy, business, and culture. This is not to undermine the importance of a diverse educational model, however a region specific model is much better served to strengthen a student bodies chances of success. The rural student may actually have no interest or ability to become a farmer for various reasons, hence one would argue that a region specific educational model is only holding the student down from reaching success in the metropolitan economic system. This may hold true were the teaching approach left only to agricultural studies. However, it is the responsibility of the local teacher and board of education to recognize an approach and implentation of a curriculum which goes above and beyond the local economy through using the local economy. For example, agriculture is the most abundant learning tool available to said student and their peers, thus, it is agriculture which may be used as the foundation of how the students learn and apply their knowledge for immediate feedback. The next step is to take the apprenticeship level of these students and connect them to the technological advancements, the marketing, the reality and potentail for global interconnectivity, and further developments implementing STEM subjects and an interdisciplinary arts. A student who is a master of their local economy, ecosystem, and culture will be able to not only connect to what is beyond but they will be able to innovate what is currently available. The idea of a student mastering what inhabits their daily life has proven to work throughout Japan's history. For example agricultural practices, local crafts, blacksmiths and so on have seen successful throughout generations. So why is it now that these regional specific practices have given way to a national curriculum? The answer is not clear, the answer is muddled with confusion and an economy, culture, and way of life which now lacks diversity. The consequence of this is a population now flocking to large cities and a dwindling countryside population with too small of a labor force. Japan however has a very competent association of teachers who would surely be able to turn this problem around were they given the liberty to create a curriculum, based on an agreable set of standards for the sake of helping a younger generation of teachers learning to maximize the potential of their students. To require a national curricul undermines the brilliance of teachers to adapt to students, current events, local economies, and varience in regions. To potential of non-national curriculums far outweighs the mediocrity of national curriculums. Students who want to have immersive educational experiences will leave the public school system as even the United States experiences with just Statewide curriculums. To have a national curriculum is to funner students into a thinning funnel. The ideal regional and diverse model of education relying on students to be immersed in their surroundings and teachers to apply their expertise is the future of education and an educated society.