Statement–Argument (Common National Syllabus for Graduate Courses): Statement: Should all universities adopt a common syllabus for every subject at the graduate level across the country? Arguments: I) Yes, it is the only way to bring uniformity to the education system. II) Yes, it will standardise the quality and comparability of graduation credentials. III) No, universities require autonomy to tailor curricula to their missions and regional needs. Choose the strongest evaluation.

Introduction / Context:
Curriculum policy balances comparability and mobility against academic freedom and regional relevance. A nuanced approach often uses common minimum frameworks with local flex.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Employers and students benefit from comparable standards (II).
• Innovation and contextual relevance depend on curricular autonomy (III).
• “Only way” claims (I) are typically weak when alternatives exist.

Concept / Approach:
II is strong—standardisation improves comparability. III is strong—autonomy fosters fit and innovation. I is weak due to false exclusivity.

Step-by-Step Solution:
I: Overstates necessity ⇒ weak.II: Direct benefit for portability and benchmarking ⇒ strong.III: Preserves diversity and responsiveness ⇒ strong.

Verification / Alternative check:
Common core + elective autonomy models reconcile II and III.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Including I endorses a fallacy; excluding II/III ignores key objectives.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming uniformity requires total centralisation.

Final Answer:
Only II and III are strong.