Yes, the united states public education system should have a standardized curriculum, but only to a point. People should still be allowed to home school their children if they so desire, and public education should be funded and standardized through middle school to ensure the maximum benefit per tax dollar. However, after middle school, there should be no government sponsored public education. Private education and autodidacticism fits right in with the free American ethic.
I agree that the education system should standardize the curriculum. There are many students that are left behind in the U.S. education system because they are not studying the topics that they need to focus on. This destroys their future as they are not accepted into universities because they cannot compete with people who have more knowledge. By standardizing the curriculum, children will have a basic area to at least meet. From there, students can excel. But, a standard curriculum will only help our students and improve the future of our society.
Currently each state has the right to choose what material it wishes to teach. This unfortunately leads to situations such as Iowa where the state does not want to teach Evolution, to the detriment of the students in that state. It's unfair that children have less opportunity based on where they live and hence the curriculum should be standardized across the US.
The United States should adopt a standardized curriculum for all public schools. In our mobile society, children who move between school districts or states suffer from an inequality of educational standards. Districts and states are too divided on educational quality, because they often place too much emphasis on community values. In addition, the availability of funds dictates the quality of education, as many schools with poor funding operate with outdated educational material.
If the United States was to standardize the curriculum in the schools it would make it easier for kids that move a lot. There are children that have to move quite a bit due to either their parents jobs or the military. When they do they have to find out where the new school is in their learning. Sometimes they may be behind and have to catch up or be forced to learn the same things again.
The curriculum should be standardized because it would benefit the nation as a whole to learn the same things as opposed to learning certain things in certain areas where local jurisdiction has mandated that certain things be taught. If we would standardize the educational system, we could expect reasonable progress from all grade levels as they would have expectations that other kids would have and it would be beneficial to society.
The United States education system should be standardized to give every student equal access to superior learning tools and knowledge. The current education system is suspect - it is only as good as the local administrators that map the curriculum. A standardized system would ensure that students seeking a college education would be adequately prepared to compete.
I can speak from my own experience, while attending high school and college. There was always one class that I was in where the teacher would wind up saying, "You should have learned this in grade school!" and, depending on what school we went to, some of us had, and some of us hadn't. Students in all schools should be learning the same basic knowledge and skills, at least at an elementary level. Middle and high school classes can still have electives to help students prepare for different vocations, depending on what they choose. But, there should be basic, standardized learning in elementary and middle school. This will also help American students be on the same level as foreign students, many of whom test higher than Americans.
Standardizing the curriculum in the United States would ensure that all children, regardless of school or location, would get the exact same education. Attaining an equal education would give children the same start to life, and an equal chance of having the knowledge needed to pass college placement tests, which could have bearing on the rest of their lives.
The U.S. should standardize the educational curriculum, so the standards are the same. I do not believe in No Child Left Behind, because I think it has hurt the school system. I do believe that, if children are all learning the same thing at the same rate, then they have more of a chance to succeed as a future nation, and it evens the playing ground. The U.S. educational system has to step it up and bring back some of the basics. I think, especially for the elementary school years, it should be cut and dry, and to the point. But, teaching should not just be teaching to prepare for the tests.
The way I learn is not the same way as the person next to me. We all have different learning styles, as well as different learning attention spams. Although I feel that everyone should learn the material to be covered in standardized tests, there should be different approaches to teaching, and what is to be taught.
It is difficult to determine how to standardize curriculum within the educational system because each student is coming with a variety of needs and background knowledge. A student in Florida will not have the same concepts as a student in Maine simply because of geographical factors to start with. If the student in Florida has not seen snow, they do not have the same basis of understanding as a student who is consistently around snow. This is one way to show that situational factors make it difficult to determine standardization in many cases. Furthermore, students should be able to learn a variety of ways through the curriculum.
People who advocate standardized education do so simply to make things simpler for the adults in the system. "We need to be able to compare all of our students to find strengths and weaknesses in the student body as a whole." That argument just makes no sense. In an economy that increasingly demands flexibility and ingenuity, giving all of our students the same education simply stifles innovation. People like to think that making our students well-rounded will ready them for uncertain futures and careers, but it simply makes them largely unprepared for any specific situation, when what they really need is a customized education that plays on their strengths and supports their weaknesses. One that lets society know the skills this person excels at, but also states that they're not completely incompetent with other skills. You can argue that's what college is for, but the 12 years of public school beforehand, couped up in one classroom after another, constantly trying to meet standards that have no certain purpose or goal are what cause the high dropout rate and low graduation rate that prevent students from reaching the expensive college. We need to get students involved, with a more purposeful, hands-on education with the skills they really will need in the future. Science and math are great for an engineer, but do little for an advertiser. College may help solve that, but that makes the years of biology lessons in public school a complete waste. As for the role of teachers themselves, I agree we should pay them more, because of the important role they play in society, like emergency service workers, but only if they are doing a good job of teaching. Remember, the public education system is for the students, not the teachers.
I have taught school for nine years, and have seen ever-increasing pressure to "pass the test." We are no longer teaching children. We are teaching a curriculum that has been handed to us that may or may not address our students' needs. There is more to becoming an educated person than just passing a test at the end of the year. I have recently read that there are several high performing nations, including Finland and Sweden, that have moved away from a national curriculum and national testing. Instead, they have given schools the power to determine their own needs and assessments locally. That strategy seems to be working.
No child left behind hasn't left children behind but has dragged down the cream of the crop. School systems around the country are struggling to keep up with the demands of this program which has been soundly criticized while the US continues to sink behind other countries. Many other countries begin tracking students at a young age and putting them in courses that will meet their individual needs. Gifted students are challenged while lower students are given the tools they need to be successful. This is the way the US needs to go to keep up with the rest of the world.
I believe there are multiple reasons to not standardize education curricula within the United States: First, at the level of primary and secondary school, individual growth and expression is already discouraged; I fear that standardization would do further harm by not allowing teachers and schools to experiment with teaching methods. Second, the needs and economic abilities of host communities simply vary; this is self-evident. Third, assuming one were to standardize curricula at the college level, this would defeat the benefit of having a multiplicity of different schools with different focuses and methods. Fourth, I believe there are simply more important problems within education which need to be addressed. For example, I fear the mere existence of curricula encourages students to focus upon grades, on-paper performance, versus, indeed to the detriment of, genuine learning, by encouraging regurgitation instead of understanding.
It is my belief that a standardized education curriculum is a certain way to create a nation of "Stepford wives" or its equivalent. In standardized testing there is always one correct answer or solution to a problem. Real life is rarely like that and sets children up for an unrealistic view of what they will be presented with in the future. This type of environment can not lead to building wholesome people with unique and intriguing ideas. It leads to learning by rote and categorization of the ones who conform to these strict standards and do well under them and the others who do not. It takes away the ability for a teacher to bring creative and lively thinking into a lesson plan. What teacher wants to merely be a person who opens the same book every day and presents it the same way? This is beyond asinine and should not be an idea that is pursued at all. Make the teachers more accountable when their students do not progress as they should. Teachers should get merit salary increases and not cost of living increases. This will encourage a system in which everyone has a stake and the right to their own ideas and responses.
Education is about learning, and education should be given in a very diverse manner. Standardizing educational curriculum will lead to students who are not idealistic. Students should be taught based on the institutions beliefs. I believe that standardizing the educational system will lead to a generation of people who are not free thinkers. It is important to provide a wide variety of subjects for students in order to promote free thinking.
Since there is diversity among our 50 states in regard to their ethnicity and their individual histories, I believe that it is important for the states to have control over the curriculum that is taught in their state. In this way, students will be exposed to the history of their own state as well as the history of the United States. I think that this is one area where the power should be delegated and not taken over by Washington. The bigger a bureaucracy is, the harder it is to handle!
School systems that are relying on paragraph sections of text to explain the concepts we know in this world is hurtful. We need more open forum types of learning where the students are becoming more involved. Or at the least, make the high school degrees WORTH IT. We spend 12 yrs of our lives, only to get basic skills...but nothing more. Why not have us do a job training program so we can at least get some freaking experience.