Worzel
This cannot be entirey of the schools' doing, as the MCC is part of the integrated course. Natually in order to compete the student with a modular fATPL must take an MCC, so it was tagged tot he end of the full-course modular programmes that were being deveoped. In fact this all happened too quickly to be a result of the chain of evnts you suggest. By the time I looked at courses in December 1999, before JARs were in effect the MCC was part of the Cabair and SFT courses, the two I looked at.
SkySheriff
You seem to have the same views as an old, very experienced pilot I once had the temerity to argue with. We came onto the subject of crew co-operation, and he (an arrogant ex-fast-jet, single-seat pilot) refused to accept that the current feeling was that a lot of accidents are caused at least partly by poor crew co-operation. If you sat the MCC you would see the advantages to it just from the case studies that you are taught about, past accidents and learning from the errors of those crews.
worzel
I don't think the MCC was ever intended to teach procedures. The procedures are unimportant and generalized, it is opening the student's mind to the pitfalls of cockpit relationships that seemed to be the bulk of what was directed at me. Therefore the specific procedures are irrelevant (and in fact could conceal problems if you learnt with procedures that happened to be imperfect in their ease of MCC), and they should be taught as you say on the type rating and line training, but of course always with reference to what has already been learnt abouc crew co-operation and management. Of course a lot of what is learn on MCC is about when procedures break down, and you don't want to concentrate too much on that during type and line training!