The best curriculum is not one based on a static body of knowledge but one which teaches students to cope with change. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

In

this

day and age, people assume that lessons might depend on traditional knowledge while others believe that teachers might change individually. From my point of view, I do agree that individual lessons might outweigh traditional lectures.

First

of all, the traditional lesson plan might be reliable rather than individual

experience

which might be incorrect and the students whose knowledge are received would be confused by the misunderstanding of teachers. In fact, curriculums might depend on former

experience

with numerous changes over time.

Although

it would not be suitable in the current age, a stable basis plays a crucial role in higher education.

Furthermore

, the lack of practical

experience

might lead to numerous consequences which would be the main reason for children gaining compliments due to the teacher's mistake.

By contrast

, young teachers might be more curious and energetic than seniors to discover new techniques and activities to urge their pupils to understand easily.

On the other hand

, outdated knowledge might cause a serious problem which would be a fake theory that students who might be future experts spend their career following that error.

Consequently

, it would take centuries for scientists to prove the theory wrong.

Moreover

, an advantage that previous generation scientists might not have is the technology which would be a vital element for exploring new mysteries.

As a result

, human beings would approach another civilization and by the time eternity life would not be far away. In conclusion, despite the absence of

experience

, a personal curriculum might be a better solution rather than mutual lessons which are not suitable for everyone's teaching style.