(Original post by Andronicus Comnenus)
If you asked University Lecturers they;d probably agree with you...mine moaned about the fact that A levels are becoming increasingly useless as a measure of a student's suitability to student life.
Personally: I believe the best system would be to divide into two totally different systems. Rather than Grammars and Comprehensives which follow the same curriculum, wouldn't it be better to put all of those who were of an academic persuasion into one school, and to place all of those who have no interest in academic pursuits into technical schools where they can pick up a trade? I believe that was how the system was originally supposed to work, wasn't it?
I've got very mixed opinions on some of things you've said in this thread. But what you've said in this post is quite absurd.
What age would you make people chose between academic subjects and a trade I'm assuming it would be at age 11, an age at which most people have no idea what they want to do when they are older, or at least an age at which their ideas will bare very little resemblance to what they actually end up doing.
This may have been how some system was originally meant to work, I've no idea, but it's not how it works now and it's not how it's meant to work now for good reason that you can't shove people one way or another 5 years or 7 years or more years before they will start work. They don't know what they want to do at age 11, most don't even know at 14. It's probably not even beneficial for this to happen even if they did know. In KS3 there are still loads of general things pupils need to pick up that would mean education would be essentially the same for at least 2 or three years, which ever route they took...so why the need for separation? It would just mean many people found themselves in the wrong sort of school and would need to change over. Moving school is a traumatic experience, leaving friends behind, trying to find new friends when friendship groups are formed. Settling into a whole new system. I'm against any system of school which fundamentally has school changes built into to make up for errors which could be made due the system not being good enough or flexible enough to allow children to do what is best for them at the school they are already at.
Also, having two school systems over the whole country is highly impractical. What about rural area which only have one school now? Would they have two? Or would you expect 700 pupils to be bussed out 20 miles to other distant areas while another 700 are bussed back the 20 miles in to fill the places in the school they would otherwise have gone to? Sounds quite absurd doesn't it? Wouldn't a school system where all the schools are the same and from which each individual pupil can get out what is best for them, whether this is academic or vocational, allowing all pupils to reach their full potential? Even if the direction of this potential changes several times during their school years?
What I've said here can equally be said about a nation wide school system involving Grammars and Comprehensives, not just academic and vocational schools.