The argument for national curriculum standards instead of the current system under which each State sets its own curriculum standards is that high standards set at the national level will require all students to perform at higher levels. A review of existing comparative research on standards set both at national and subnational levels, however, is weak. First, there has not been much comparative research done; and second, what little research has been done has typically focused on standards combined with high stakes for students rather than the effect of national standards per se. Third, the research has not controlled adequately for unobserved variables, especially cultural features or changes in attitudes. This paper argues that successful education reform should focus on universal school choice whereby education funding is given to parents and schools are autonomous within a free market. Parents will then choose a school for their children based on parental judgments on school curriculum and performance. This would force schools to respond to the needs and demands of parents and children. Critics of such a system argue that it would result in an absence of standards and schools catering to the biases and subjective preferences of parents. This paper argues that such a system would allow ideas to compete in the marketplace, and those that are wrong would not have been imposed on everyone. 92 notes