Social and Cultural Foundations of American Education/Chapter 10 Supplemental Materials/Is a National Curriculum needed? 1
From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection
Contents |
[edit] Is There a Need for a National Curriculum?
by Michael Gayheart, ECI 301 Old Dominion University
There has been a lot of debate over the years on whether there should be a National Curriculum in the U.S. Oppositionists argue for less government control over school systems' educational requirements and more local input on these matters. Organizations in support of a National curriculum argue that more of the guidelines for education should stress equal education throughout the country thus requiring a government entity for control over the standards, which are set for education. It should be known that each of these groups, whether they are for or against a National Curriculum, only have the children’s best interest in mind.
The U.S. is a leader in the world in almost every facet imaginable and should remain so. We are by no means on the verge of becoming a third world country but we should strive to stay a step ahead of everyone on the globe as much as possible. This is where education plays a vital role in all things global. Education is primary in being able to lead and should never lack in any way the ability to pave the way for success. The main question still stands. In which of these methods lies the most successful outcome for our children for a better and brighter future?
One of the major arguments of a National Curriculum is whether or not the more rural schools have the money and the means necessary to keep up with the technology that would be required in such a curriculum. The same goes for the poorer school districts within the larger cities. Are all our school systems equal enough in financing to afford such a technological environment? Is it fair for schools that are not able to meet these requirements financially to be penalized for what they can not afford? There should be no doubt that each child has the ability to complete the material that is required of them but would the material required be relevant to their demographics? Subjects such as math, english, science, etc. have certain requirements that must not be avoided but, should the readings in literature and lessons in history be chosen by some national governing body? Educators and communities should be able to work together and agree on lessons that are
|
What?! A Nuclear Korea and a National curriculum! We better bring out the old Duck and Cover from the 50’s! |
taught in the previous subjects mentioned, but this doesn't cover every objection expressed when considering a National Curriculum.
More likely a larger problem that some people have with a National Curriculum are national standards and assessments. Linda Darling-Hamilton of Teachers College, Columbia University reasons that, “top-down specifications of content linked to tests cannot take into account the many pathways to learning that will be appropriate for different students in schools across the country.” She also states that, “large inequalities in opportunities to learn are more responsible for learning gaps than a paucity of tests.” For an example, lets say that a man plants an apple tree one hundred miles away from any other apple trees. And another man plants another apple tree in the middle of his existing apple orchard. With the pollination that occurs in the orchard, the tree planted there should bear plenty of fruit but will the other tree that is miles away from any other apple tree be afforded the same opportunity? It may sound a little silly but some may consider our schools in somewhat the same manner. Are the poorer school systems afforded the same opportunity to “bear fruit” as the more affluent schools?
Many people believe that education lacks certain creativities where standardized tests are implemented. They argue that when educators are put “under the gun” they only teach to the test. This in turn can lead to fewer activities that could make the learning process more enjoyable for the student. Is learning a test more valuable than allowing a student the creativity and enjoyment that education can provide? Some may say that the teacher should be allowed to practice their ability in order to motivate the student to not only want, but also desire to learn.
Supporters of a National Curriculum have a valid argument also. It is logical that education should have structured expectations that all colleges and universities can go by when accepting students. With the growing knowledge in the world today, it is not fair for the student or the college, if some students are prepared and some aren’t. Also, schools should be held accountable for the preparation of students. In today’s world there are probably higher expectations from college graduates than ever before, and these expectations continue to grow. Every day, employers continue to implement higher standards on employees, thus the education institutions must do the same.
In With Clear Eyes, Sincere Hearts and Open Minds: A Second Look at Public Education in America, Andrew J. Coulson states that, “Our greatest problem, and yet the one whose magnitude we most often underestimate, is our astonishing failure to serve low income and minority children.” With these types of failures some may argue that the only recourse is a National curriculum. This is an undeniable problem and must be remedied as soon as possible. He also stated that, “one quarter of 16- to 25-year-old Americans cannot read or write well enough to understand a bus schedule.” Statistics such as these are unacceptable in this age of information. Our schools in some way must be held accountable if we expect to ever change frightening numbers such as these.
When considering a National Curriculum, it should be noted that if we are in the “information age” then no child should ever be deprived of a substantial and adequate education. With the technologies that are available today, there is access to all the knowledge in the world. It seems that the problem then is how we present and make it affordable to and for everyone. Our schools should have access to the same information, the same materials, and the same programs. This by no stretch of the imagination means that different regions and different communities shouldn’t have input on what their children are learning in schools. They should, but all children should have access to the same resources to improve their education.
There are many arguments for and against a National Curriculum, most having the student’s best interests in mind. Someday all children will be afforded an equally beneficial education but for now this day can’t be soon enough. Students in the United States have more opportunities than students in any country in the world. It is our responsibility, as citizens, to look toward the future of education. We should always be researching new ideas and ways to stay one step ahead. Education is not a political game and should never be treated as such. We should always strive for new and better avenues to educate. “We have a National Curriculum. We need a BETTER one.” (Dwight W. Allen and Robert C. Brinton)
[edit] References
Dwight W. Allen and Robert C. Brinton (Jan./Feb. ’96). Improving Our Unacknowledged National curriculum. The Clearing House,V 69, p140-143. Retrieved sept. 21, 2004, From the H.W. Wilson Webb. http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.proxy.lib.odu.edu
Boston, Carol (2004). The Debate Over National Testing. Eric Digest. Eric Clearing House On Assessment and Evaluation Washington D.C. Retrieved sept. 21, 2006 from Eric Digest www.eric.ed.gov
Coulson, Andrew J. (2002-07) With Clear Eyes, Sincere Hearts, and Open Minds: A Second Look at Public Education in America. Mackinac Center for Public Policy. www.mackinac.org Retrieved sept. 21, 2006, from www.eric.ed.gov
Michael W. Apple (winter ’93) The Politics of Official Knowledge: Does a National Curriculum Make Sense? Teachers College Record. V. 95, number 2, winter 1993 Retrieved sept. 21 2006, From www.eric.ed.gov
Linda Darlington – Hamilton (aug. 1994). National Standards and Assessments: Will They Improve Education? American Journal of Education. V.102 (aug. ’94) p478-510 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.proxy.lib.odu.edu
[edit] Multiple Choice Questions
1. Both advocates and oppositionists of a national curriculum ___ . A) Believe that religion should be taught in schools including prayer. B) Believe that different methods are valid and could be implemented depending on which one works best. C) Have the student’s best interest in mind. D) Have reason to believe that if their curriculum isn’t invoked soon a socialistic style of learning will emerge.
2. 25% of 16 to 25 year olds cannot ________. A) Begin to understand simple math. B) Afford education in public schools. C) explain even the most popular events in our nation's history. D) read or write well enough to understand a simple bus schedule.
3. One of the major arguments with a national curriculum is A) whether or not religion of all kinds will be taught in our public schools. B) That students may not be able to handle the pressures of the curriculum involved. C) the implementation of mandatory prayer in schools. D) whether or not the poorer schools have the money and the means necessary to keep up.
4. Linda Darling- Hamilton of Teachers College, Columbia University states that A) “the work loads placed on students are their responsibility." B) “a national curriculum should be designed for the sake of the students.” C) “ large inequalities in opportunities to learn are more responsible for learning gaps than a paucity of tests. D) “ in a national curriculum tests will be at a minimum.
5. _____________ of 16 to 25 yearolds cannot read well enough to understand a bus schedule. A) ¼ B) 50% C) ¾ D) 2/3
[edit] Answers
1.C
2.D
3.D
4.C
5.A
[edit] Essay Question
Discuss one of the problems people may have with a National Curriculum.
