Post your essay. Get expert feedback. For free.We're trying to help students improve their writing the hard way. Do you know students who want critical essay reviews from a professor of English Literature? Click like to share. Click here to sign up and post your own essay. We offer no paid services. All reviews are completely free.
A Nation Should Require All Of Its Students To Study The Same National Curriculum Until They Enter College. - With A Free Essay Review
The different schools, both private and public, in a nation teach according to the curriculum that the institute feels will most benefit the student. There is no centralised system or any means to regulate and maintain a standard curriculum. This leads to non-homogeneity in the knowledge acquired by students from different schools. Different curriculum is taught by different schools, making it difficult for students who have to change schools and for students when they have to choose a college. Nations should work towards establishing a curriculum that has to be followed by all schools.
Without the same national curriculum, difficulties faced by students are quite significant when they change their schools, because of the difference in the curriculum. Changing in school may result from parents being transferred to other cities or because their jobs demand change in residence. This change in curriculum hinders the child’s academic growth.
Students entering undergraduate colleges after school may find it difficult to adjust to the syllabus offered by the college. Some students may be at an advantage, whereas others may not. Studying the same curriculum would eliminate any sense of inferiority among students as everyone will have the same knowledge base. Colleges would be able to fix on an eligibility criterion that is suited to the knowledge acquired by the students. Discrimination on the basis of having studied a different syllabus would not be felt for the selection process. Additionally, the task of establishing a syllabus by the college would be simplified.
Creation of a unified curriculum would not be a simple task, as it may require the establishment of a centralized board that defines the curriculum, and ensures that both the private and public schools follow it. The curriculum could permit for regional studies and other courses that the school would want it’s students to take up along with the curriculum that every school should follow. All the more, centralized examinations, where all students take the same exam and are evaluated on a nation-wide level, would ensure that schools are following the required curriculum and aid colleges in assessing students who apply to their institute.
Although setting up of a national curriculum would be a daunting task, it would be worthwhile, and once schools adopt it curriculum, continuing it would not be difficult. A national curriculum will benefit the students as well will aid the colleges by creating homogeneity and uniformity among the students.
The opening paragraph seems weak to me, if only because it is made up of a series of untrue assertions; there are many schools that are not free to choose their own curriculum, and there are many states that have a national curriculum. The first paragraph is also largely unnecessary; you could as well begin with the second paragraph.
The argument of the second paragraph is reasonable, although phrases like "are quite significant" are a bit vague. The paragraph ends with an unsupported assertion (if you want to include assertions like this, but don't know how to support them, then stick an "it may be" in front, or change "hinders" to "may hinder").
The third paragraph makes a series of reasonable claims. Some of these claims need to be explained. For example, if your final point is that colleges need to know what students have studied in order to develop appropriate syllabi, then that point ought to be made explicit before claiming that the task would be facilitated by the existence of a national curriculum. The paragraph as a whole lacks an explicit general argument or topic (indeed it has no topic sentence as such, the first sentence of the paragraph being just one claim among others), although its implicit topic is fairly obvious.
I think the most significant weakness of the essay (although this might depend on the specific set of instructions you were responding to) is its one-sideness. You look at reasons for supporting a national curriculum, but not at possible reasons for not wanting a national curriculum. Your final paragraph is vague about the nature of the problems that might attend establishing or having a national curriculum, and you don't consider the possibility that different students (or students from different regions) might be better served, for any number of possible reasons, by a curriculum specifically designed for their needs.