The post that caught my eye was
We have had too many go through an academic route into teaching and lecturing with no workplace experience who are developing academic dogma based in impractical and unworkable ideologies.
It's the govt who decides what subjects and content to teach at what stage, and how OFSTED want to see it taught, not the teacher. The Senior Leadership Team in school also often make sweeping statements as to how the lesson should look, regardless of which subject it is, not the teacher, again to appease OFSTED.
The school leaving age is 18, so pupils have to be in school, college or in an apprenticeship. Pupils who have not reached a certain standard in Maths and English must study those subjects beyond 16.
Universities are driven by money, so a course which doesn't attract enough interest is dropped, even though it may be a subject useful to industry. Similarly A level subjects in school without enough pupil interest will also go. Popular subjects (at either level) are often the ones pupils have not studied before. We live in a supply and demand society.
In olden days most grammar school pupils went to uni or some other form of Higher Education. That was about 18-25% of the population depending on where you lived.
Lastly, who would decide which subjects are useful and which are not? The govt would. Looking at the mess that's been created thus far, probably not.
Christmas nightmare - crying with frustration
Not the mother he expected - I can't win
Gransnet Christmas Party 2019 - you're invited