Inmy view, I agree with Buckminster Fuller’s view that “thatAmerican education has evolved in such a way it will be the undoingof the society”. The curriculum has low chances of developing intoa model that the world can use as a benchmark. Klein, Rice, and Levy,(2012) argue that American graduates lack critical skills that areneeded for certain professions such as military jobs. The deficiencyin qualified employees results in the specialization of education.Several graduates are limited to work in a certain field whileinnovation and development of technology require combination ofdiverse skills. As such, the professionals are failing because thebright students concentrate in a small field. Also, students who arenot very bright to specialize in specific technical professions oftentake the generalists jobs such as administration and policymaking.The result is ineffective policies that cannot revolutionizeeducation since in the first place the individuals are the untalentedstudents who lack the capacity to integrate skills from differentperspectives as their careers demand.
Onthe contrary, I would advocate that the American curriculum to adoptversatility such that graduates could explore all their areas ofacademic strengths. According to Lopez and Louis (2009), the theoryof “Strength-based Education” asserts that humans are talented invarious areas of life. Therefore, the philosophy advocates allowinggraduates to focus on several studies that they feel talented.Educators begin by establishing their strength areas and then applytheir skills while assisting other graduates in identifying all thesectors that they can excel.
Toavoid undoing of the advancement the human society has achieved inthe last few centuries, Roberts-Hull, Jensen, and Cooper (2015)proposes enhanced control of Initial Teacher Education (ITE)reformation through the government control of the training programs.Several universities offer teachers’ training programs that areautonomously controlled by independent universities. Consequently,the approach has lowered the quality of education teachers receivetherefore, United States will need to enforce higher control on thecurriculum to match the progressive standards.
Klein,J.I., Rice, C. & Levy, J. (2012). U.S. education reform andnational security. Councilon Foreign Relations.Retrieved fromhttps://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCcQFjABahUKEwiS2vSO9Z7HAhVI1hQKHe9wAvg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cfr.org%2Fcontent%2Fpublications%2Fattachments%2FTFR68_Education_National_Security.pdf&ei=j87IVdLWHsisU-_hicAP&usg=AFQjCNFmkxE-1aUSzDmDhDvFEzY15XeDkA&sig2=rl7Twlg0qwT3USwaPl3enw
Lopez,S.J. & Louis, M.C. (2009). The principles of strengths-basededucation. Journalof College & Character, 10(4),1-8.
Roberts-Hull,Jensen, and Cooper (2015)
Roberts-Hull,K., Jensen, B., & Cooper, S. (2015) Anew approach: Teacher education reform.Melbourne, Australia: Learning First