Europe never abandoned it's "Elitist Discrimination" instead they build it into the foundations of the education system. It's a different model that instead relies on the fact that for most Europeans their lives are often decided when they born. While most Europeans receive some form secondary education they are pipelined at a young age into roles based on various factors that they are in no control of. It's not better than our existing system but it's not exactly the same.
Instead in the European model while Alumni is not considered, those Alumni have a generational advantage that often makes it so that these children end up in the same place as they were born. In the same way it can be very difficult for children born into lower class families escape from the preset paths in life that they are given.
> While most Europeans receive some form secondary education they are pipelined at a young age into roles based on various factors that they are in no control of
This is simply untrue. It might have been the case a century ago, but is certainly not the case anymore.
It is probably less strict than a century ago, but it is still the case that if you never started or fell off the academic track somewhere, it is very hard or almost impossible to get from the technical track back to the academic track.
This is true in many European countries. But for a kid from a poor family where no one has an academic background and chances of success in higher education are low, a good technical education can still provide significant upward social mobility. If you train to be a competent mechanic, welder, carpenter, mason, electrician, plumber, ... you're set up for a pretty comfortable middle class life. You can even get quite wealthy if you start a business.
I don't think it's necessarily bad that the education system tries to identify students which have low odds of making it in higher education, and offer them an alternative route that results in them having an in-demand skill and some work experience when they graduate at 18 years old.
I'm not at all convinced that an approach where students of all levels are kept in the same classroom is better for the weakest students. I imagine the experience of struggling (and often failing) to keep up every day must be exhausting and demotivating (and perhaps even humiliating). I also have never seem any evidence that such an arrangement is better for weak students in any metric (but I'm happy to change my mind of this if such evidence is provided).
where are you getting that from? i didn't even finish high school and say i wanted to do a masters of computer science at cambridge, all i need is to rush through a 4 year undegrad degree from just about anywhere with an 80% average.
someone who can work 80 hours a week can do that in 10 months or less. especially if you're already an engineer and you're good, it's a breeze.
undergrad is dead simple, it's literally built for teenagers, it's not hard to get back on track.
This doesn't really show much besides the fact that for many European Countries they don't suffer from the same form of income inequality as we do. Note that Japan is ranked 15 yet is one of the worst examples of this. The Social Index tells nothing of the lives of the people in these countries.
In Japan you have to be admitted into a high school program and from their the trajectory of your life starts. All the way into the College process. It's not a fair system yet it's ranked 15.
In Europe, it's easier for someone from the 20th percentile of income to break into the 80th percentile of income. The type of social mobility GP seems to be talking about is escaping the "working class" into the modern equivalent of the aristocratic class (8 figure net worth).
[Citation needed]. Europe is not some monolithic thing. The education systems between the UK, Germany and Russia differ a lot in how early people have to make decisions about their lives, and how stratified the student classes are.
Correct + part of the reason Russia is so fucked up is extreme elitism and a massive gap between the provinces and the 2 gigacities. It's like if NYC and London were dropped in the middle of Kazakhstan, and both groups were raised to hate each other.
That just isn't true in the context of higher education which is what's discussed here. You can still get free higher education in the best universities in Russia regardless of where you were born and raised in the country. There are a lot of problems in Russia and the system of education in Russia, but extreme elitism and exclusivity are not at the top of the list
Also not true in tech. Can't really say anything about other professions, but if you can code you won't have any problems finding a job in Russia. Again, regardless of where in the country you were born
Instead in the European model while Alumni is not considered, those Alumni have a generational advantage that often makes it so that these children end up in the same place as they were born. In the same way it can be very difficult for children born into lower class families escape from the preset paths in life that they are given.