Having the same curriculum nationwide may indeed have certain benefits. However, such an extreme recommendation is built on several critical assumptions that cannot be overlooked.
Requiring all students to study the same national curriculum until undergraduate education irrationally assumes that all students throughout the country have similar goals. Many students choose not to go to college for a variety of reasons. For example, some students have a passion for a vocational field. Perhaps others may have post-highschool jobs lined up for them in the family business. While others may have a desire to join the military upon graduation. If a student has decided early to pursue auto-mechanical studies and work cars, a number of required courses in history and latin would merely be a waste of time and effort. This time could be better used for hands-on training or classes geared specifically towards career oriented interests. Instead of Latin, the mechanically inclined student could choose to spend a portion of their day in an elective 'shop' course. These students who have already chosen not to enter into a traditional college, a universal curriculum offers little to no benefit.
Offering a variety of courses to select from would not only give students the flexibility to choose from their pool of interests, but would also give undecided students the opportunity to explore. How would a student with no previous exposure to vocational studies know if they enjoy it or not? Highschool is a critical time where many students discover their passions. A strict curriculum offers no room for creativity and would only benefit those with undergraduate education in mind.
This idea builds on the one positive aspect of adopting a universal curriculum. For those students who do indeed choose to go to college, having a constructed curriculum that spans the nation may perhaps make college entry more streamlined. Comparing one student to the next is simply a matter of comparing the successful completion of coursework. Everyone enters with the exact same basic level of education to build on. However, it can still be similarly argued that many enter college for a variety of reasons.
In conclusion, education should be interest specific. Suggesting a national curriculum pre-college offers little to no benefit for both those who have already selected a career path, and for those who have not. Moreover, those who do decide to go to college have equally different paths to choose from. Offering a strict universal curriculum will only waste time and limit exposure.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 394, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ned up for them in the family business. While others may have a desire to join the mi...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 192, Rule ID: MIGHT_PERHAPS[1]
Message: Use simply 'may', 'perhaps'.
Suggestion: may; perhaps
...ructed curriculum that spans the nation may perhaps make college entry more streamlined. Co...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 36, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'interested'?
Suggestion: interested
...ns. In conclusion, education should be interest specific. Suggesting a national curricu...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, may, moreover, similarly, so, still, while, for example, in conclusion, of course
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 19.5258426966 41% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 58.6224719101 89% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2176.0 2235.4752809 97% => OK
No of words: 413.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26876513317 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89245020639 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 215.323595506 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.518159806295 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 710.1 704.065955056 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.1224706318 60.3974514979 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.6666666667 118.986275619 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2083333333 23.4991977007 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.625 5.21951772744 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.255959495589 0.243740707755 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0691217810864 0.0831039109588 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0863823032608 0.0758088955206 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13190669157 0.150359130593 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0696953334092 0.0667264976115 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.1392134831 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.99 12.1639044944 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 100.480337079 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.