This is an insightful, well-articulated discussion of curricular responsibility and the larger issue of academic responsibility. After a brief introduction examining assumptions implied by the topic, the writer skillfully develops the position that letting students dictate the curriculum could dilute the educational experience. Allowing students to determine the curriculum, the writer claims, will deny them the guidance and direction they need to learn academic responsibility.

The line of reasoning is strengthened by the discussion of how teachers and students can work in partnership to satisfy the needs of students. The argument is further advanced with concrete examples from high school courses showing how teachers provide guidance for students through group collaboration, development of interpersonal skills, and preparation for college. The examples are varied (from condom use to reading Angelou, Yeats, or Euripides) and used effectively to further support the writer’s position.

In the conclusion, the writer thoughtfully discusses how educators should not only determine the curriculum but present it in an enlivened and appropriate manner. The final sentence, contrasting a "self-destructive course of premature self-determination" and "a cooperative, mentoring relationship," ties the essay together.

The essay is clearly organized, although the writer does not rely on conventional phrases (such as "first," "second," etc.) to signal the organizational structure. Instead, the organization and focus progress through the line of reasoning that moves fluently and coherently from one paragraph to the next.

Language use is generally precise and effective (e.g., "holding royalty accountable to the mob"), and sentence structure is well controlled (e.g., "hard work must be lauded, while freeloaders are punished"). The few errors are minor, the kind that can easily be made -- and forgiven -- under testing conditions.

This outstanding response received a score of 6.