Issue 3

　　"A nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college rather than allow schools in different parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer."

　　The speaker would prefer a national curriculum for all children up until college instead of allowing schools in different regions the freedom to decide on their own curricula. I agree insofar as some common core curriculum would serve useful purposes for any nation. At the same time, however, individual states and communities should have some freedom to augment¹ (改为argue)any such curriculum as they see fit; otherwise, a nation's educational system might defeat its own purposes in the long term.

　　这是一种不同于前两篇的开头：先陈述原文观点，再有让步地反对。我们要学习的好句子：I agree insofar as… “在某种程度我同意此观点，因为……” at the same time, however,接着陈述自己观点……otherwise,…

　　Serve useful purposes for…;

　　see sth. fit, 觉得……合适；

　　defeat one‘s own purpose

　　in the long/short term

　　A national core curriculum would be beneficial to a nation in a number of respects. First of all, by providing all children with fundamental skills and knowledge, a common core curriculum would help ensure that our children grow up to become reasonably informed, productive members of society. In addition, a common core curriculum would provide a predictable foundation upon which college administrators² and faculty³ could more easily build curricula and select course materials for freshmen⁴ that are neither below nor above their level of educational experience. Finally, a core curriculum would ensure that all school-children are taught core values upon which any democratic society depends to thrive, and even survive——values such as tolerance⁵ of others with different viewpoints, and respect for others.

　　简短说明原文观点的必要性，也为下面的驳论作铺垫，形似咱们的阅读了。我们要谨记在心的是它的first of all, in addition, finally,的结构，这是最简便的分层次论述，但不可用得过多。

　　However, a common curriculum that is also an exclusive one would pose certain problems, which might outweigh⁶ the benefits, noted⁷ above(这两词多余). First of all, on what basis would certain course work be included or excluded, and who would be the final decision- maker⁸? In all likelihood these decisions would be in the hands of federal legislators and regulators, who are likely to have their own quirky notions of what should and should not be taught to children——notions that may or may not reflect those of most communities, schools, or parents. Besides, government officials are notoriously susceptible⁹ to influence-peddling(peddled) by lobbyists who do not have the best interests of society's children in mind.

　　这些论据是我们中国学生不便提出来的。但是，他的一些词句也是需要记下来：outweigh the benefits; On what basis would …? In all likelihood, be in the hands of

　　Secondly¹⁰, an official, federally sanctioned curriculum would facilitate the dissemination¹¹ of propaganda and other dogma which because of its biased¹² and one-sided nature undermines the very purpose of true education: to enlighten. I can easily foresee the banning of certain text books, programs, and websites which provide information and perspectives that the government might wish to suppress——as some sort of threat to its authority and power. Although this scenario¹³ might seem far-fetched, these sorts of concerns are being raised already at the state level.

　　进一步阐述上一段的论点，这一点很重要。我们平时能够做到这样就尽量陈列观点，关键要有说服力。

　　有用的词组：propaganda, dogma, biased/one-sided nature, undermine the very purpose of… scenario,

　　Thirdly, the inflexible¹⁴ nature of a uniform national curriculum would preclude¹⁵ the inclusion of programs, courses, and materials that are primarily of regional or local significance. For example, California requires children at certain grade levels to learn about the history of particular ethnic¹⁶ groups who make up the state's diverse population. A national curriculum might not allow for this feature, and California's youngsters would be worse off as a result of their ignorance about the traditions, values, and cultural contributions of all the people whose citizenship¹⁷ they share.