Topic - A nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum

I remember talking to my friend about uniformity of curriculum, in the 12th grade, just after our board exams and were preparing for entrance examinations for university. She studied the national curriculum whereas I went to a school that taught state-level curriculum and the two differed in terms of complexity as well as content. Nevertheless, we had to appear for the same national entrance exam in order to qualify for admission to the undergraduate courses in university. This had me thinking, isn't it unfair for students who study state syllabus, to prepare for the national curriculum as wel; whereas students who study the national syllabus don't have to prepare separately for their entrance exams ?

I agree with the contention that the nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. Entrance exams for colleges should provide a standard platform of assessment of the students' performance. Apart form these exams, when the students get admitted to colleges, most of the students are academically at par. This provides equal opportunity to everyone to excel in college examinations. Take the example of the Indian Education system. The system has separate syllabi for each state, plus two different national curriculums. Even though the content of each if more or less the same, there is a stark difference in the level of application of knowledge desired, and the amount of complex thinking required from the children. The national curriculums are generally tougher than some of the state curriculums. Hence students who study the national syllabus are intellectually more competent than the rest and have an edge over them in college. This disparity proves highly disadvantageous to some students whol rely only on state syllabus throughout their school life. Moreover, the effect of diversity in curriculum is not limited to academics only. It puts an emotional pressure on students to perform better than or at least as good as their counterparts and more often than not most of the students end up overworking themselves. Hence, adopting a same curriculum nationwide would put students at the more or less the same knowledge level and the discussion of ideas would be more free than it would be otherwise.

However, taking the case of India, a rich cultural diverse country with its rich history, it might not be possible to maintain a uniform syllabus for all subjects. For example, every state has its own history and it would be burdensome to students if they are made to study the history of all states. Hence the education board has to pick only parts of history from all states and this becomes unfair to the culture of the states in general. Hence, the board is faced with the challenge of maintaining a uniform balance between maintaining a uniform syllabus as well including the subtle diversities in other states.

Education is a basic necessity and it is the nation's duty to provide decent quality education to it's youth. However, after weighing the pros and the cons of maintaining the same curriculum throughout the nation, I conclude that the nation should make sure to ensure uniformity of curriculum so as there is a standard to objectively assess students'performance and every student has equal opportunity for academic excellence at the pre-college level.