[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I actually completely agree and have thought that pushing academics and University "for all" has been a mistake from the start. I have a friend who wasn't brilliant academically but his mother really pushed him with studying / exams and it made him utterly miserable, it just wasn't for him, but there's this idea that it "has" to be done. He was studying for 6 hours at night and getting C grades in subjects that myself and others in our friendship were getting good grades in without much effort. It made him feel "stupid" and inferior no matter how much we assured him that he wasn't stupid, his skills just lay elsewhere. Which they did - he stuck with school all the way until 18 and left with poor grades, but got straight into a practical apprenticeship in aerospace engineering, and has done very well for himself. Even built an extension on his house single-handedly with help from a few friends. I can ace an exam with barely ten minutes revision, but, as anyone who has seen my attempts at any sort of DIY will attest, my skills in pretty much anything of that nature are... severely lacking. It wouldn't be a stretch to say "abysmal". He also makes more money than I do, of course, despite my top grades and University education. Sigh. In fact, I believe he probably makes more than most of my friends who went on to get degrees, even the ones who (unlike myself) actually went into their chosen field after graduation. All except one, I think, but he went into pensions / investments / banking ('nuff said...).

I can think of plenty of other examples. I was quite friendly with a guy in my woodworking class who was far from stupid, in fact he was hilarious and sharp as they come, and I would say genuinely gifted in woodworking. He made clocks, tables, all intricately carved and really quite impressive, aged 14. Never caused any trouble in those classes - was totally focussed. I think I managed to nail together a vague box shaped thing that was covered in dried up glue. But no one ever seemed to pick up on it, he could definitely have made a career out of it, but those classes were almost thought of as "extras" and he played up in "regular" academic classes, was constantly in trouble, and didn't perform well. I ran into him when I was back in my home town a few years ago (I think I was about 25 at the time) and he was completely off his face, quite clearly a drug addict. Just a mess. He chatted to me and shook my hand and talked about the woodwork class and my hilarious creations and then stumbled off. It was ****ing heartbreaking to be honest.

But yes, anyway, two examples where I can see exactly what you mean. One worked out as he found something he loved and was good at straight after school (and it was only luck really, a friend of his uncle got him the apprenticeship) and the other ended up in the gutter. Both, really, were totally failed by a school system that pushes academic achievement on all, when some simply aren't cut out for it.

On the flip side, I also feel that because there were so many people there who had to have their ability level accommodated in the curriculum, I (not to blow my own trumpet too hard) personally feel like I was never challenged anywhere near ENOUGH academically at school. I found the work painfully easy, and I test well. I was bored out of my mind a lot of the time and it led to me becoming really quite lazy. I didn't have to work hard for an A, so I got used to not working very hard. That laziness followed me to University and, looking back on it, I completely wasted the time I spent there and didn't put in half... or quarter... of the effort I could have to make myself really stand out. I don't regret going - I regret not bothering to excel. A lot of that is my own fault, of course, but I genuinely do think that if the school system was "split", as you say, and the more academically minded pupils could be really pushed to achieve their potential, and the less academically minded pushed to pursue the areas where they are skilled, we would have a much more productive (and more importantly, much happier) society overall.


So yes, in principle I totally agree. I would potentially raise the suggested age from 12 to 14, though. I think there are still some "basics" that need to be focused on up until the age of 14, dropping completely out of academic education at 12 would leave a lot of people's basic knowledge lacking I suspect.

This is weird (don't want to mention synchronicity ) but I was exactly the same at school - not really challenged and bored out of my skull. I too never inputted what i should have as a result, and regret it to this day.

It's sad to hear about the kid with the woodworking skills but I have also known some similar cases, and I agree that non-academic classes were marginalised and treated like 'extra's'.

I see from MTVN's post that he agrees with you about 12 being too young for accurate assessment but I only put it out there and you're both probably right.

I'm chuffed that so far it seems an agreeable idea.

ps. please go back to your original avatar, I think that shit between us is over and I apologise for saying it - I didn't really mean it anyway T.S.