Um...
Yes, I am not a fan of Toby Young, I am not a fan of Free Schools...
However, I am not so 'done to death' by PC that I can't see through some of his commentary to the point he's trying to make.
FWIW I have a problem with a 2 tier exam/testing system. Why? Because I think it should be 10 tier.
I have no issue with the concept of DS1 taking 10 'O' levels where his ability should net him 3 or 4 A's, a couple of B's, a couple of C's, or so. I have no problem with DS2 taking 7 or 8 CSEs, maybe an 'O' level or 2, or maybe B.Tec, or an OND, depending on where his interests and talents lie, come 14. Yes, 14. I truly believe that it's fair enough for someone to be 'set on a course' at 14. So someone like DS2 might become a competent plumber at 18, for instance. Especially in these days where education goes on being available throughout one's life. Attempting to keep all doors open to all DCs is utterly counterproductive. Baulking at the O level 'rigour' prevents our state schooled more academically able from being able to compete with often more average private school DC who have IGCSEs under their belt. So yes, keep the GCSE, but introduce an O level. Keep the GCSE as the middle ground, and introduce CSEs for the less academically gifted.
DS2 is in Y6, and he is academically 'average'. I know this for a fact as he is almost certain to get 4s for his SATS and was independently assessed (by his literacy tutor) as being at around Age 11 for his writing, comprehension, spelling, with reading coming it at 12.4. And I get really cross when I say to my MC, degree educated workmates with similarly aged DCs that my DS2 will 'do OK', he'll most likely be heading for the local technical school and will become a tradesman, like his 2 uncles, and they say 'Ooh, how could you say that? He's 'only little', he may suddenly take a great leap forwards , how could you condemn him to an apprenticeship at 11?'! The inference is 'Come on, Litten! He may yet not fail!' as if my realistic appraisal of his abilities is in someway failing him, my full understanding that university would be a complete waste of time and money for him (though I suspect the notion of 50% of DCs going to uni will be long dead, come 7 years hence), that he'd be far better off doing an apprenticeship. It is a country-wide extrapolation of the idea that anything other than academe is 'failure' that is really failing our DC, the one-size-fits all (or a pretence that it does) GCSE system.
All I ask is that the DCs all attend the same school and are not segregated into grammars, SMs, Technical colleges etc. (How many people knew that every town was supposed to have a Technical school as well as a GS and SM?!)
The Big Issue is that we, as a society, have allowed ourselves to be dazzled by academic performance alone, thus all DCs, regardless of their sometimes patent unsuitability ( eg too 'driven' for the modularity of GCSEs; not just 'not clever enough' for them), are pushed into the same style of exam. Much of the rest of Europe (whom was all appear to cite so wistfully when comparing our own allegedly 'rubbish' educational system with) have no problem at all with differentiating DCs and their abilities at 14; these'd be countries that still have a manufacturing industry, who value practical and engineering skills, wouldn't they? Unlike us who consider the apogee of success to be 'a job in banking'.