Issue-96. A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.

——————————————————————————————————————————

满分范文赏析

Nations should not require that all students study the identical curriculum. Only in cases where all children learned the same way and all teachers taught the same way could every child were presented with the same material. Neglecting differences in learning and teaching styles would stifle creativity. Furthermore, there are inherent dangers in uniform education—the system could very easily be misused. Developing a national curriculum is a bad idea.

【此段结构】  

文章第一句直截了当表明国家不应令所有学生学习一致的课程。第二句指出教授一样的课程需要所有教师以同样的方式教，所有学生以同样方式学，接着在第三句指出这扼杀了创造力。第四句进一步指出“uniform education”存在内在危险性。第五句再次申明实施全国统一的课程并不明智。  

【此段功能】  

提出作者观点，预告下文论述。  

Children all learn in very different ways. Standardization leaves little room for exploratory learning. One child may learn how to spell from reading, another may learn from phonics. If the curriculum is standardized, it may not favor different learners equally. While national curriculum is a bad idea, general requirements are essential.

【此段结构】  

这段不长，但可以看作是总分结构。首句作为中心句，点明学生们的学习方式各不相同。第二句起解释标准化课程有扼制探索性学习的弊端。第三句举例说明学生学习拼写的方式各异。第四句指出标准化课程对学生的消极影响，即不能让每一个学生平等地获益。第五句补充道全国统一课程不可取，但总体需求还是要提的。  

【此段功能】  

反驳一，从学生的角度，提出学生的学习方式各有不同。  

Teachers all have different methods of teaching. If say, the English curriculum of all high schools was standardized, and then a book that one teacher teaches excellently and uses to inspire students might be eliminated. While that teacher ought to be capable enough to teach the curriculum books, his or her students will still be missing out on what might have been the greatest learning experience that teacher had to offer. Realistically, learning is based on enthusiasm. National standardization could eliminate that to the detriment of everyone.

【此段结构】  

首句简单明了地提出教师的授课方式各不相同。第二句举例指出，如果高中的英语课程变成全国统一的，那么某些教师用的很好、学生也满意的教科书可能就被弃之不用了。接下来进一步说，尽管教师有能力教好其他教材，其学生也可能会错过一些这个教师本来可以带给他们的最好课堂体验。最后两句谈到学习是以热情为导向的，全国统一课程会将这种热情降低，并且伤害学生的学习效果。  

【此段功能】  

反驳二，从教师的角度，提出标准化课程下的授课方式不利于学生学习。  

Learning should be enjoyable and children and adolescents should be taught not only the curriculum in school, but that the body of knowledge that exists in the world today. Having a national curriculum implies that there is a set group of things worth learning for every person. Maybe this is true, but for students, it sets up a world where there is a finite amount of knowledge to be acquired and only tests to look forward to. Teaching a standard curriculum doesn’t encourage inquiries, it doesn’t encourage students ask develop the capacity for critical analysis. School’s real purpose is teaching people to learn, not just teaching them a set group of facts. By teaching them to learn, students can continue to learn on their own. They will be able to extend skills from one area of knowledge to another. This type of learning fosters creativity that can be used not only in math, science or English, but also in art, music, or creative writing. Teaching a brain to go beyond being a file cabinet for facts is the best way to teach creativity. Standardization is a nail in the coffin for creativity.

【此段结构】  

第一句提出本段论点，所学的知识不应局限于学校课程，而是存在于世界的知识的总体。第二句起解释只学习课堂课程的局限性，以及这容易导致只为考试而学习，难以发展批判分析能力。后面指出学校应该教给学生学习方式，而不只是学习内容，接着简述了教授学习方式的益处。  

【此段功能】  

反驳三，从所学内容的角度出发，解释标准化课程只教授具体知识，而难以启发自主学习和思考能力。  

There are many reasons not to standardize the curriculum and too many reasons to celebrate individuality. The creativity of a nation as a whole would fall with a standardized curriculum. There is no person, no group, and no committee capable of deciding what to be included in a standardized national curriculum. The wide variety of information and identities in every country need to be sung. Curriculum should have standards, but it should not be standardized.

【此段结构】  

第一句总结全文并总起本段，指出标准化课程有很多弊端，相反，个性化很值得鼓励。第二句起重申了标准化课程扼制创造力，多样化的课程应被推崇。最后一句意味深长地指出，课程应该有标准，但不需要全部标准化。  

【此段功能】  

总结全文论述，重申作者观点。  

——————————————————————————————————————————

满分要素剖析

一、语言表达
通过本文可以看出，作者能够熟练而地道地实用英语进行GRE issue作文的写作，表达自己的观点并进行论述。文中不少词语和表达的选用很精妙，不仅令本文生色，还对其他备考生有一定启发作用。

1、If the curriculum is standardized, it may not favor different learners equally. 本句中的favor是及物动词，表示有利于、有助于，即benefit，help，或者be to the advantage of的意思。考生在想表达类似意思的时候可以选用favor，显得很地道。

2、If say, the English curriculum of all high schools was standardized, and then a book that one teacher teaches excellently and uses to inspire students might be eliminated. 这句话开头的if say是一个在英文媒体中经常见到的搭配，意为“假如说”，表示假设，因此本句也是采用了虚拟语气，叙述实际中没有发生的情况。

3、While that teacher ought to be capable enough to teach the curriculum books, his or her students will still be missing out on what might have been the greatest learning experience that teacher had to offer. 首先说这句话中的短语miss out (on sth)，是“错失、错过…良机”的意思。此外，句尾的that teacher had to offer中含有一个sb have to offer的固定搭配，意思是“某人能够提供的”，举例来说，它常见于主语/宾语从句中的“what we have to offer”，这里的have就是动词拥有的意思，而不是和to连成have to表示不得不。

4、Standardization is a nail in the coffin for creativity. 作者在这句话中使用了一个惯用语——a nail in the coffin，或者可以说成a nail in sb’s coffin，字面上看是指棺材里的一根钉子，实际上的意思是指促使某人早日灭亡的东西，致命一击。

5、There are many reasons not to standardize the curriculum and too many reasons to celebrate individuality. 这句话中celebrate的意思不是最常见的“庆祝”，而是“颂扬、赞美”的意思。同样的还有全文倒数第二句的…to be sung中的sing，除了唱歌之一，也有赞美的意思。

二、逻辑结构
本文的逻辑完整而清晰，作者为了支持自己对题目的反对意见，在总分总的框架下，从三个角度提出了反驳的论述。首段和尾段分别提出和总结了作者观点，中间三段分别代表一个角度。具体来说，作者从学习者、授课者、学习内容三个方面分别反驳了题目中提出的观点，而这三个内容已经足够涵盖教学的要素，也是本题围绕的中心，因此这个论述角度的选取还是很完整的。每一段的反驳论述也能选取得当的事例进行支持，增强说服力。