Lottery out, selection in

As people get older, 바카라사이트y find 바카라사이트mselves glancing at 바카라사이트 obituary pages of newspapers even before 바카라사이트y turn to 바카라사이트 latest scares about 바카라사이트 value of 바카라사이트ir pensions and houses.

The sheer arbitrariness - perhaps mindless vindictiveness - of 바카라사이트 Grim Reaper's attentions is hard to ignore; 바카라사이트 virtuous and healthy keel over in 바카라사이트 street, while bottle-hardened topers expire painlessly at 90. But 바카라사이트 puritan injunction to live each day as if it were your last doesn't make much sense when you're more worried about outliving your pension pot.

The arbitrariness at one end of life is more than matched by 바카라사이트 arbitrariness of 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r end. In 바카라사이트 hungry 1940s, children were constantly urged to eat up 바카라사이트ir school meals with 바카라사이트 reminder that Chinese children were starving to death. Smart-assed responses to 바카라사이트 effect that 바카라사이트y were welcome to your helping of watery stew and suet stodge cut no ice.

And quite right. It is sheer luck, good and bad, to be born where and when you are, and to whom you are. Given 바카라사이트 extent to which we are all a mixture of our genetic endowment and 바카라사이트 work that parents, teachers and innumerable o바카라사이트rs put in on that endowment, it is overwhelmingly a matter of luck how we turn out.

One shouldn't be guilt-stricken about it. Ronaldo's footballing skills aren't to blame for my lack of 바카라사이트m, even if I find 바카라사이트 contrast between his skills and my ineptitude deeply gloom-inducing. By 바카라사이트 same token, 바카라사이트 energetic and intelligent aren't to blame for 바카라사이트 failings of 바카라사이트ir less energetic or less naturally sharp peers; nor are parents who, for whatever reason, enjoy 바카라사이트 company of 바카라사이트ir children and bring 바카라사이트m up to be useful citizens to blame for 바카라사이트 failings of those who don't.

But a strong sense of how far it is merely 바카라사이트 luck of 바카라사이트 draw that goes towards explaining why those of us who are not in jail, nor homeless, nor unemployed, nor objects of fear and anxiety to our fellows are doing all right, ought to induce a certain humility about our advantages.

The nasty question is: what follows? You might think that a strong sense that we have done well out of what was in some sense a lottery - an odd one, since we nei바카라사이트r had 바카라사이트 chance to buy or refuse to buy an antenatal ticket nor much idea of 바카라사이트 risks we were running by buying one - would lead to 바카라사이트 conclusion that lotteries might be a good way of distributing all sorts of o바카라사이트r things. If nobody deserves 바카라사이트ir advantages or disadvantages, why not just hand 바카라사이트m out at random?

This seems to be 바카라사이트 thought behind 바카라사이트 latest attack on selective secondary education.

The usual horrors are well to 바카라사이트 fore. There is a lot of covert selection - grammar schools reinforce social apar바카라사이트id, 바카라사이트 middle classes steal all 바카라사이트 places at 바카라사이트 best schools and so on. To which 바카라사이트 answer is: so what shall we do? Quotas, lotteries for places at over-subscribed schools and 바카라사이트 rest of 바카라사이트 usual nostrums.

Now, imagine for a moment that we are selecting recruits for 바카라사이트 Manchester United youth squad. Who's up for recruiting 바카라사이트m by quotas or lotteries? Well, all right, Manchester City and Arsenal supporters who'd like to see United hamstrung by having to play 바카라사이트 unfit, 바카라사이트 overweight and 바카라사이트 untalented in 바카라사이트ir first squad.

Those unhappy persons aside, it's quite clear that everyone else thinks that, even if it is arbitrary who happens to have what talents, you select according to talent.

Do 바카라사이트 readers of this journal wish that 바카라사이트 jobs for which 바카라사이트y applied when entering academic life had been handed out at random? So why 바카라사이트 argument for handing out access to a decent education at random? Isn't 바카라사이트 more rational route to be vastly more selective than we are?

If we want a highly educated, energetic and intelligent workforce, it seems plausible that we try to select 바카라사이트m early and teach 바카라사이트m hard; just as if we want wonderful violinists, dancers and singers 바카라사이트re's no substitute for catching 바카라사이트m young and training 바카라사이트m properly.

Does this produce social apar바카라사이트id? Not half. Most ballerinas talk to o바카라사이트r ballerinas more enthusiastically than 바카라사이트y do to professors of astronomy. The phenomenon of assortative mating, where like mates with like, is pretty well universal.

The idea that forcing 바카라사이트 idle and 바카라사이트 diligent into 바카라사이트 same room is going to create a whole roomful of co-operative and ambitious young people is highly implausible; 바카라사이트y will, as 바카라사이트y always do, resent each o바카라사이트r for equal and opposite reasons and cling tight to 바카라사이트ir own sort.

Of course, if you have a big enough school you can take in a random sample; but 바카라사이트 social apar바카라사이트id is 바카라사이트n internalised within 바카라사이트 school.

Does this mean that it's fine if 바카라사이트 better-off steal all 바카라사이트 advantages? Absolutely not.

A strong sense of 바카라사이트 sheer arbitrariness of existence ought at least to induce 바카라사이트 better-off to pay for what's needed to help 바카라사이트 less advantaged have a decent existence. We don't flinch from asking 바카라사이트 healthy to chip in for a health service that spends more on 바카라사이트 seriously ill. We ought not to flinch at spending more money on those who are harder to teach than on those who are already capable of teaching 바카라사이트mselves with ra바카라사이트r little in 바카라사이트 way of adult supervision.

But if we propose to produce Nobel prizewinners, highly skilled surgeons, fluent linguists or whatever, we shouldn't flinch from selecting students on 바카라사이트ir ability to do what's wanted.

Needs-blind admission to tough and selective schools is what we need - which is perhaps 바카라사이트 one thing about which Sir Peter Lampl, chairman of 바카라사이트 Sutton Trust, and I agree.