ns to the variables of the curriculum should be
such as aim to secure a reasonable continuity and sequence of subjects
in one or more of the fields selected. One of the chief barriers to a
more general flexibility has been the notion of inequality between the
classical and all other types of education. This assumption has had its
foundations heavily shaken of late. The quality of response which it
elicits has come to receive precedence over the name by which a subject
happens to be classified. "France has come out boldly and recognized at
least officially the exact parity between the scientific education and
the classical education."[58] Indeed one may doubt whether this parity
will ever again be seriously questioned, because of the elevation of
scientific training and accomplishment in the great world wars as well
as in its adaptation for the direct and purposeful dealing with the
problems of modern life. Especially for the early classes in the high
school does the situation demand a relatively flexible curriculum, else
the only choice will be to drop out to escape drudgery or failure.
Inglis maintains that the selective function of the high school may
operate by a process of differentiation rather than by a wholesale
elimination.[59] The pupil surely cannot know in advance what he is
best fitted for, but the school must help him find that out, if it is
to render a very valuable service, and one at all comparable to the
success of the industrial expert in utilizing his material and in
minimizing waste. The junior high school especially aims to perform
this function that is so slighted in the senior high school. Yet
neither the organization nor the purpose of the two are so far apart as
to excuse the helplessness of the latter in this important duty.

There is apparently no constitutional impediment to a still further
extension of the principle of flexibility and to the minimizing of loss
by what has been a costly trial and error method of fitting the pupils
and the subjects to each other. Short unit courses are not unfamiliar
in certain educational fields, and they lend themselves very readily to
definite and specific needs. Their usefulness may be regarded as a
warrant of a wider adoption of them. Although they are as yet employed
mainly for an intensive form of training or instruction to meet
specific needs of a particular group in a limited time,[60] the
principle of their use is no longer novel. A unit course of an