Core Curricula, Integrated Writing, Test 1, Kaplan

In the article, the author explains what core curricula are and then demonstrates that both universities and students gain a lot from this system. However, the speaker of the lecture casts doubt on the author's opinion and cites several reasons to support his standpoint.

In the first place, according to the speaker, some courses of core curricula are too easy for students to learn. Moreover, some other courses are totally irrelevant to students' majors. The speaker also mentions that some obligatory courses of core curricula are just outside students' primary interests. As a result, students couldn't learn much from these courses. All these three points are contrary to what are expressed in the article which writes that core curricula give students a broader perspective on life.

In the second place, the speaker of the lecture says that a few curricula in core ones are too big for students to study as well. In the speaker's opinion, those courses' size is too large and students couldn't do well in these classes. This is in conflict with what is said in the article. The speaker also mentions that guidance should give students some advices on how to get well in core curricula. Furthermore, the speaker holds that core curricula ought to offer creative ways to satisfy students' need. According to the speaker, guidance should also provide opportunities of internship to help students with their careers.

However, if we could solve all the problems mentioned above, students surely are the very beneficiaries. First, universities would increase enrollment of high-quality students and thus ameliorate public profile. Secondly, students would learn the most paramount courses in core curricula and don't have to learn too easy, or rigid curricula they don't like. As a result, students would have careers of promising prospect.