And there was me thinking that expressing my own opinion was okay!
My point doesn't refer to individuals, as such. If the schools were struggling to get enough candidates to fill their intake quota, the simple solution is to reduce the entry grade cut-off. If they have 50 applications for 20 places, and the pass mark only fills 15, and only 10 of those can actually secure the funding, what do you think the school will do? Operate a course with only 10 students? Think about it. Reducing the entrance score increases the number of people you can take. The schools are there to make money. And having the money to pay, whether you like it or not, is a criteria.
It is fair to give people a second go at the assessment, yes. But I'd be interested to see how many are not invited back. My guess is very few. It has nothing to do with reflection and everything to do with maximising the opportunity to make money.
I think that most of the big integrated schools operate to similar levels with respect to entrance tests. I also think that if you are the kind of person who struggles with those tests, the more personally paced approach you can get with modular would probably suit you better. With integrated you are stuck to a reasonably rigid program, because they operate to prescribed timescales. With modular you can take a break, spend a few weeks or months longer on one aspect or another. Or you can progress more quickly than integrated, if that works for you.
With regards the tests, I have a colleague who is a highly accomplished aerobatic pilot who also flies for an established airline who couldn't pass the hand-eye coordination test. This is because the way it is set up actually makes it harder if you are already a pilot. The sim is a much better place to test this. The multitasking, orientation and Maths sections are reasonable because you need those skills in the way that is reasonably close to the way that they are tested.
Again, just my opinion. Take it or leave it. But there's no need to get upset.