Consider the following
statement. The government should provide a national curriculum for all children
up until college. Do you agree with this idea? Support your response by
including specific reasons and examples.
☆Let’s Think
Notes
1) The word “should” is about ideal situations, so the discussion could
be purely in theory, as in “We should not kill even for self-defense”. The word
“should” also means duty, so that the focus of the discussion can be about
responsibility, as in “The government should support the disadvantaged”. It
also means necessity, as in “We should exercise caution in changing the whole
system.”
2) In Japan, where we live, there is a national curriculum for all
children up until high school. Universities are allowed to decide what to teach
by themselves.
1.
Read the sentences below and
answer the questions.
a.
May was here up until now. When did May leave?
b.
May was educated in Japan up
until high school. Do you think May went to Japanese high school?
c.
May wants to study up until
graduate school. What academic credential does May want?
2.
Discuss in pairs or groups what
would happen if there were or were not a national curriculum at each level of
education, compulsory education, high school, and college in terms of
egalitarianism, freedom, and regional needs.
|
|
egalitarianism
|
freedom
|
regional needs
|
|
compulsory education
|
|
|
|
|
high school
|
|
|
|
|
college
|
|
|
|
3.
Tell your partner or group
members whether you agree with the statement or not and why.
☆Hints for Points
Agree:
1.
It is egalitarian. All children
can receive adequate general knowledge required today.
2.
Quality of education of all
universities will be ensured.
3.
It will strengthen the national
power. It is easy to produce a type of workforce needed by the nation.
Disagree:
1.
University is for autonomous
studies. Students decide what they study.
2.
It will reduce freedom.
Possibility of teaching will be limited.
3.
Regional needs are not
reflected in a national curriculum.
4.
We need an international
standard for higher level of education.
☆Sample Essay Structure
【Introduction】I cannot entirely agree with the idea that the government should
provide a national curriculum for all children up until college. College
students should be free, and the existing curriculum does not seem to be
working very well.
【Point for Agreement】A national curriculum guarantees a certain level of quality of
education throughout the nation.
【Reason for Disagreement 1】The idea touches the problem of how much the government should
control. It is also impossible for the government, or anyone, to know what
university students should learn.
【Reason for Disagreement 2】The goodness of a national curriculum in itself is questionable.
【Conclusion】On the one hand, curriculum for all up until college under the
guidance of the government is egalitarian, but on the other side, it seems unnecessary
and unrealistic. Therefore, I cannot totally agree with the idea.
【導入】政府が全ての子供たちのための大学までの国家カリキュラムを提供すべきだという考えには完全には賛成できない。学部生は自由であるべきであり既存のカリキュラムはあまりうまく機能していないように思える。
【賛成理由】国家カリキュラムは国中である水準の質の教育を保証する。
【反対理由 1】この考えは政府がどの程度管理すべきなのかという問題に触れる。また、政府あるいは誰でも学部生が何を学ぶべきかを知るのは不可能だ。
【反対理由 2】国家カリキュラムの良さ自体が疑わしい。
【結論】一方では政府指導の下の全ての人に対する大学までの国家カリキュラムは平等主義だが、他方では不要で非現実的の様に思える。従ってこの考えに完全には賛成できない。
☆Essay for Ideas and Expressions
As someone of humble upbringing,
I think I should appreciate that my country Japan provides a unified curriculum
for all up until high school, although as far as I remember, most of my real
learning happened outside of school. I also believe that the officials in the
ministry of education, culture, sports, science, and technology are
conscientious and sincerely care about our children. However, I cannot totally agree
with the idea that the government should provide a national curriculum for all
children up until college. College students should be free, and the existing
curriculum does not seem to be working.
覚えている限り真の学びは学校外で起こったとはいえ、私の国日本が高校まで全ての人のための統一カリキュラムを提供していることに、私は貧しい育ちの人間として感謝すべきだと思う。また、文部科学省の官僚は良心的で心から子供たちのことを思っていると信じている。しかし、政府が大学まで全ての子供たちのために国家カリキュラムを提供すべきだという考えには完全には賛成できない。学部生は自由であるべきだし既存のカリキュラムはうまくいっていないように思える。
A national curriculum guarantees
a certain level of quality of education throughout the nation. This will partly
reduce the problem of the regional difference in the quality of education.
Although difference of teaching methods will remain as the cause of the
educational level gap between regions seriously grappling with education and
those that are not, setting the minimum requirement of the class contents will
ensure that all nationals will not fail to be taught to what they should know. Therefore,
it is good to have a unified curriculum for basic and intermediate levels. It
might also be true with college. Most universities provide courses in the liberal
arts, and usually the first half of the college years are spent on the
acquisition of the introductory level knowledge of a variety of disciplines prior
to or in addition to major subjects. Thus, the national standard might be useful
to solve the problem of disparity in the level of college education. Also,
governmental management of college curriculum can help secure tax money and faculty
for necessary areas of higher education instead of having them at the mercy of corporations.
国家カリキュラムは国中である水準の教育の質を保証する。これにより教育の質における地域差の問題は部分的に減少する。教授法の違いが教育熱心な地域とそうでない地域の教育水準の差の原因として残っているとはいえ、授業内容の最低限度の要求を設定することにより全国民が知っているべき事を必ず教わることになる。従って初級と中級レベルの統一カリキュラムがあるのは良いことだ。大学でも当てはまるかもしれない。大抵の大学は一般教養科目を提供しており通常大学前半は専攻科目の前または専攻科目に加えて様々な科目の入門レベルの獲得に費やされる。従って、国家基準は大学教育の不均衡の問題を解説する役に立つかもしれない。また、大学のカリキュラムを政府が管理すれば税金と教授陣を企業の思い通りにされる代わりに必要な大学教育分野のために確保するのを助けることができる。
However, unified national
curriculum may also have an adverse effect on the advanced level of education.
First, the idea touches the problem of how much the government should control.
It would be an intervention of the freedom of university. A university is
supposed to provide a place for voluntary pursuit of intellectual interest. It
provides a primordial environment for fact-finding and creativity. It ought to
be chaotic and unpredictable, the opposite of being under a management. For
example, fundamental research depends solely upon the curiosity of the
researcher, and this freedom has allowed for Nobel Prize quality discoveries
and inventions. If there were such a government as tries to openly control the
learning of the brightest people of the country, it would be the last entity
that you would like to live under.
しかし、統一国家カリキュラムはまた大学では逆効果かもしれない。まず、この考えは政府がどの程度管理すべきなのかという問題に触れる。大学の自由の侵害になるだろう。大学というものは知的関心の自発的追及のための場を提供することになっている。事実の発見と創造のための原初的環境を提供するのだ。混沌として予測不能であるはずであり、管理下にあるのと逆なのだ。例えば、基礎研究は研究者の好奇心にのみ頼っており、この自由によりノーベル賞級の発明発見が可能になる。もし、国で最も聡明な人々の学びをあからさまに管理しようとする政府があったらその下で最も住みたくない存在だろう。
It is also impossible for the government,
or anyone, to know what college students should learn. The above-mentioned
unfettered environment for study will contribute to the development and
innovation of knowledge and skills. A humanities student would learn higher
mathematics for fun and later become a competent manager; a student majoring in
French literature would spend all four years reading all kinds of novels day
and night would see the limit of the reality depicted in fiction and become an award-winning
non-fiction writer of science and politics, as in the case of Takashi Tachibana;
a medical student who was fascinated by Egyptology would work out a new
approach to evolutionary anthropology by analyzing DNAs of old remains such as Egyptian
mammies or Neanderthals as in the case of Svante Pӓӓbo; or a future leader
of an IT giant company would take an Oriental calligraphy course and later draw
on the skill in creating new machines, as in the well-known case of Steve Jobs.
Let smart people study as they like, and something amazing would come out. It
is ridiculous for the government to try to decide what college students should
get out of university education.
また、政府あるいは誰でも学部生が何を学ぶべきかを知るのは不可能だ。上記の足かせのない研究環境が知識と技術の発展と革新に貢献する。文系の学生が高等数学を楽しみで学び、のちに有能な部長になるかもしれないし、立花隆の場合のように仏文科の学生が4年間全てを昼夜を問わず全ての種類の小説を読んで過ごし、フィクションにおける現実描写の限界をみて賞を取る政治科学のノンフィクションライターになるだろうし、スバンテ・ペーボのようにエジプト学に魅了された医学部生がエジプト人のミイラやネアンデルタール人のような古い遺体のDNAを分析することによって進化人類学への新しい方法を編み出すだろうし、あるいはスティーブ・ジョブズの有名な例の様にIT大企業の将来の指導者が東洋の習字コースをとり、後に新しい機械を作る時にその技術を使うだろう。賢い人に好きなように勉強させれば驚くべきものが生まれる。学部生が大学教育から何を得るかを政府が決めるのは馬鹿げている。
Last but not least, the goodness
of a national curriculum in itself is questionable. The interests and abilities
of people vary, and the unified curriculum may have nothing to do with what many
young people are trying to get out of life. What education helps develop is
only a fraction of human activities. The present national curriculums, for
instance, seem to be the enemy of real learning. Each child is born with a
great capacity, but most elementary school children seem to find few subjects attractive,
and after toiling all the way up to high school, many people not only fail to
acquire anything significant but also develop an inferiority complex about studies.
Moreover, even those who seem to like studying will also forget most of what
they learn at school in twenty years. This indicates that real learning seldom,
if ever, takes place under the present curriculums. Even considering other
factors such as teaching methods or the overall environment of education like poverty
or the academic achievement-oriented society, bad performance may well be
attributed to bad materials, the class contents. The system is not working, and
the concept of national curriculum itself may need reviewing.
最後ではあるが同様に重要なのは、国家カリキュラムの良さ自体が疑わしい。人の関心や能力は様々であり、統一カリキュラムは多くの若者が人生から得ようとしているものと何の関係もないかもしれない。教育が発達させるのを助けるのは人間活動のほんのひとかけらだ。例えば現在の国のカリキュラムは真の学びの敵のように思える。子どもはひとりひとり大きな可能性を持って生まれるがほとんどの小学生はほとんどの科目が魅力的だとは思わないように思える。そして高校まで苦労した後、多くの人は何も重要なことを得られないだけでなく勉強への劣等感も持つようになる。更に、勉強が好きなように思える者たちも十年後には学校で習ったことの大半を忘れる。教授法あるいは貧困や学歴偏重社会のような全体的な教育環境などの他の要因を考慮しても悪い業績は悪い材料すなわち授業内容に原因を帰することが十分できるだろう。制度がうまくいっていないのだから国家カリキュラムの概念自体の再考が必要かもしれない。
A national curriculum is
egalitarian and most people benefit from it. However, it is a double-edged sword.
What is for everyone suits no one. It seems that at least college should be left
free, but some college might perform better under governmental guidance. Therefore,
I cannot make it clear whether I agree with the idea of a national curriculum
for all up until college. It would be nice if there were a system with a wide
range of choices that provides a core curriculum for each field with a view to
helping maximum development of each individual’s ability from the elementary school
to college.
国家カリキュラムは平等主義でほとんどの人は利益を得ている。しかし諸刃の剣でもある。皆のためのものは誰にも合わない。少なくとも大学は自由にさせるべきである様に思えるが、政府の指導の下でよりよい仕事をする大学もあるかもしれない。従って大学までの全ての人のための国家カリキュラムの考えに賛成か反対かを明確にすることはできない。小学校から大学まで各個人の能力の最大限の発達を助けることを念頭に置いた、各分野に核となるカリキュラムを提供する広い選択肢のある制度があったら素敵だろう。
Your Sample Essay Structure
【Introduction = Outline】
【Point 1】
【Point 2】
【Point 3 / Counterargument-treatment】
【Conclusion = Wrap-up】
