I challenge this statement.

Many would argue that in the US the children currently being left behind are the ones who are simply "average" or just "above average". IMO, US public schools are investing most of their resources into children who are just below "proficient". These are the ones who with some additional tutoring can be quickly converted from "below standard" to "proficient" in order to meet the national guidelines. Resources are further dedicated to target special "sub-categories" in order to meet these criteria when breakout groups are mandated. IMO those children who are somewhere above "proficient" are not being invested in. Those at either extreme (identified as "gifted" or "learning disabled") at least have some protection under the law.

I like most people have two children that fall somewhere in the 2nd and 3 quartiles of the normal (bell shaped) distribution. In other words they have the misfortune of being of average intelligence, white, middle class, public school children.

My youngest struggles with reading but the school refuses to address my concerns because he because doesn't struggling enough. The school offers an early morning enrichment reading program but he is not permitted to participate in it because he doesn't "qualify" for the program. In other words I have to wait until he regresses to a "below standard" level before they will allow him to benefit from a school-based program.

My oldest at one point was just a data point to be manipulated by administrators who are not motivated to providing quality education but instead are interested in make their schools look good on paper and meet state and national regulations. When my son was in 3rd grade he scored in the 90-95% percentile for his grade level on the some standardize reading/comprehension assessments. It turns out his actual scores were 3-4 points below the "gifted" cut-off, so according to the school he was not "gifted". Keep in mind that if he was determined to be gifted the school would then be required to provide him with an IEP. I was OK with this assessment because... honestly he is smart, but not some savant or anything.

He was placed in what the school called a "regular" classroom. When the work started to come home I noticed is was all drill and practice work (low-end of Bloom's taxonomy). So I asked if he was placed in some kind of a remedial class. The official reply from the school was... "Oh no, we do not have remedial classes for this grade level, he is in a normal level class." So I asked to see the actual data for his class (no names just the test data), which they actually gave me. His class data showed that 60% (14 of the 23 students) of the children in his class had tested below a 50% compentency on the end of the year math and reading assessments. My son and 2 other students in the class scored a 100% on these measures. Basically this class met the definition of a normal classroom because the class mean was consistent with the other 4 other sections; however in reality this was a remedial class with 3 high achievers thrown in to make the overall class statistics look comparable on paper.

I know some reading my post will think I am just one of those complaining parents who is always looking for a fight. I don't believe I am. I have looked at the research on both sides of this issue. It is definitely a divisive issue to say the least. Deep down inside I believe that the risk to harm benefits favor heterogeneous classrooms at least at the elementary level. Higher levels I can see where ability grouping becomes more advantagous. Whatever level it is done at... you can be sure that it is not done solely on what is in the best interest of the children involved.

In a perfect world, having diverse heterogeneous classrooms with well trained teachers at the helm (not bean counting administrators, politicians, or loud mouth parents ) who have the flexibility to group, ungroup, and regroup children based on specific skill needs and abilities would be the best learning environment. IMO Unfortunately, reality is less than perfect.

Sorry I tend to get on a soap box with this issue.