Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-02-08 00:55:46 +0000, "Clive George"
said:

What I mean is some kids get clever/learn how to work at different
ages to others. The fixed exam time doesn't help with this.

That is part of the education of life. Unfortunately the real world of
work doesn't accept people developing arbitrarily. There are checks,
balances and measurements which have to be achieved and deliverables at
certain times. That is one of the most important aspects of life and
one that is better learned early rather than later.



And learning to cope with failure without sulking is another one.


Disagree. It wasn't necessarily social engineering for its own sake.
It was recognising that there is a problem with segregated
provisioning and attempting to solve it.

Except that there is no problem with segregated provisioning, only with
the perception that some forms of education were "better" than others.

Social engineering to make sure that everybody is seen to be getting the
same, when that is patent nonsense is a huge disservice.



That problem still exists, even though you prefer to deny it.

The only problem is that segregated provisioning isn't universally
available.


Thing is, despite your claims that a segregated system is inherently
better, real life shows you're wrong.

In fact it doesn't. The decline in standards in both the academic
and practical spheres is ample evidence that only mediocrity is produced
by a one size fits all system.

Ineed. The triumph of socialism has been to move the dysfunctional drone
from the realms of the upper class landed gentry to the council estate
chav. Arguably the former were less of a nuisance.

If one looks at the education systems of many other countries one finds
that it is common to have a range of secondary school choices suited to
pupil aptitudes available.


And quite rightly. Germany at least seems capable of turning out
competent builders..and probably Poland and Czechoslovakia too. Sweden
for all its dreary mediocrity, does good dentists..