Let's examine the concept of a national curriculum

I am primarily an English teacher. I fear a dry and boring curriculum that would have every kid in 10th grade in the country reading the same book at the same time.

When you look objectively at society, you see that new ideas and creative solutions come from everyone, everywhere. In fact, most ideas start at the bottom and work their way up. I know that it is hard to see that in today's America, dominated as it is by a kind of distorted capitalism that values size over reality and jabbing elbows over creativity, but, creativity is within us. Today, I subbed for a young history teacher. His major project in his American history class this term was for the students to write letters as a Civil War person. The rubric for the project said they would be graded for the quality of the persona, the amount of history incorporated in the letters and the authenticity of the details. There would be no room for such a wonderful project in a national curriculum.

When I hear the words, "national curriculum," I think, "Big Brother is watching you."

one point in favor of a national curriculum is that it would help those students whose parents have moved adjust to a new school.

i find it odd that conservatives would favor this proposal, which is counter to conservative causes like local control, home schooling, vouchers, and charter schools. (at least, i thought those were conservative causes)

While I, too, find it difficult to understand the support conservatives give to a national curriculum in terms of their advertised philosophy, when one considers that the right is certain that schools have gone to hell in a handbasket (they have not) because of liberals (liberals actually began educational reform from the ground up in the late 60s), then the scenario becomes plausible.

However, a national curriculum will not help kids adjust to new schools because the adjustment is largely social.