Universities, as a consequence, look to differentiate candidates but hit a ceiling where discernment between a 97% and a 95% is functionally impossible. As a consequence, they then look to extracurriculars, further de-incentivizing academic difficulty as students seek good-looking extracurriculars instead of studying. Furthermore, high schools cannot merely stop, because nobody wants to be the administrator of a high school that has worse grades than its peers—an example of the Prisoner’s Dilemma. This creates a situation where students are held to a lower standard in high school and then thrust into a higher standard in undergrad, hurting them worse than exploring these topics in high school would have been.
Anecdotally, as an American, I had a similar experience where high school focused on algebra, but my undergraduate physics focused on calculus, which I thankfully knew ahead of time so I could spend the summer preparing. It was ultimately one of my most challenging and rewarding classes, but it also featured a lot of struggle for students who were caught off-guard. The professor was accommodating (this had been a problem for several years already), but it really shows how unprepared these systems are leaving students.
Ultimately, my own time in education and in self-study has informed my current beliefs, which is that the most important part of evaluation is the final exam, and everything else is meant to build you up to a sufficient level of mastery. High school and even university students shouldn’t fear that their midterm might be 79% and thus avoid higher learning opportunities they might be capable of. I feel like, as a whole, we overestimate the worth of inherent abilities and don’t consider the work required to get there, punishing failure as a consequence instead of constructively building on it. Einstein was inherently gifted, but he needed self-study and formal education to achieve what he did. Without that education, he would have just been a naturally intelligent but somewhat mundane man.