I side with Haim in mocking the assembly line one size fits all mentality that still haunts the USA's education machine hailing from "factory schools" days, i.e. we use Taylorism and regimentation, to turn out carbon copy clone good doobies who'll feed big industry the steady supply of workers that capitalism craves (hey, what system *doesn't* want an army, an obedient rank and file, hey?).
In the 1960s (some earlier), the computer gurus tried to work around this "one size fits all" inefficiency (it really doesn't work well) by setting up "self guided readings" in software, i.e. you'd come to decision points with built in assessments, and be encouraged to reread certain portions, or try out on this new topic, and so on -- everything coded so a teacher wouldn't need to keep track of 45+ kids and their many exquisite idiosyncrasies.
But of course the "I'm special" crowd can't abide any whiff of artificial intelligence doing some of the grunt work. The very idea that junior, a next Einstein in the making, would take instruction from a "mere machine"... Of course that wasn't the proposal, but proud parents, once they get that glint in their eye, may be hard to talk sense to.
Fortunately, a lot of this is just water under the bridge by now. Now we've got Google.
Kids come home from school (a dino graveyard in many cases) and discover for themselves what it means to read at their own pace.
For some, that'll mean snarfing up Amy's book in an afternoon. For others, like Owen the topologist, it'll be like "who's Amy?" (Harvard business, early in her career a student of Dr. Arthur Loeb's, the MIT crystallographer who wrote some front matter for Synergetics (he taught about A & B modules in his course plus kept an eye on Bucky as he rose through the ranks, looking for character flaws (check Anansi's new Coxeter bio for more details http://philmat.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/extract/nkm019v1 ))).