I'm not arguing that there isn't something wrong with current education, but I feel the point here may be misrepresented.
I'm... competent (at best) at math. I'm below-average as a writer. However, mechanically I do very well. I can visualize and understand how things fit together very easily. I have a sort of inherent sense of order.
That comes in really handy when working on complex systems. In computer science efficiency is often found in organizing systems, not necessarily in pure calculation (map-reduce would fall under that for instance, even if there is a strong mathematical basis).
Spatial reasoning is actually one of the biggest things I look for in hiring.
How did you decide that? I'm really curious here, since only based on your comment, you seem above-average to me.
I know an example among my close relatives. The person in question is probably in poor shape as to verbal and mathematical achievement/intelligence much more from having lousy instruction in elementary school than from having a bad family background (considering what other people in the same birth family with different teachers in school were able to do, and what neighbors who had the same teachers were NOT able to do), but the effect in adult life is the same--lacking reading and math skills holds many people back, even if they have very strong spatial abilities.
More broadly, for any set of subsets of mental abilities, some people will be lucky and have above-average levels in all of them, and some other people will have wide "scatter" in their abilities. This is rediscovered every time a new brand of IQ test is normed.
I agree that to excel in sciences you will need more than spatial reasoning alone.
Also, spatial intelligence has many dimensions. For instance, I cannot visualalize something complex like a human face but have little problem rotating simple shapes or moving chess pieces in my head, which makes me think my spatial reasoning is stronger than my spatial memory or pure visualization ability.
If you feel the point is misrepresented, I suppose you should be more specific.