The Need for a National Curriculum is great. A National curriculum would set what each school would teach for each class, and it would put students more on the same bar as everyone else, regardless of the grade of school they went to. Every kid in the United States should be at the same point of education when they reach College, this would simplify college and erase the problem of "Do my students know this already?" Or "Do they have no clue what I'm talking about?" Many essays are written on educational hardships or the separation of students by how much they know, but with a National Curriculum these would have been solved, and the writers wouldn't have had to struggle to get back to par with standards, as shown in the anthology Rereading America.
As shown in Mike Rose's essay "I just want to be average," if there was a National Curriculum, he would not have had a problem with his test scores being mixed up, because every student would have learn the same curriculum in each class.
In his essay he writes about how he was placed in the Vocational classes in his school, because his test scores were mixed with that of another student who, as he would have said, was not up to par. He also states that a, "test split his school into the smart section,"college prep," or the dumb students,"vocation education"" (164) How can a single test determine what a student should learn from that of another student? If we had a standardized bar for what each class teaches, then what would It matter what class you were in? "Students float to the point you set" (Rose, 164), with a national curriculum every students point would be set the same, so they would "float"...