In fact, grouping experts recommend strongly that the GT kids be the top of one class and the high-average kids be the top of a totally different class, so that both groups do better.
So who gets to be at the bottom of the class in which the GT kids are at the top? Is there a serious proposal that, say, if we split kids into four groups by subject proficiency, say, A B C D from the top, it's best to have two classes, one with the As and Cs in it, the other with Bs and Ds? It's an interesting idea, but I see problems!
I think the root problem is competitiveness itself. For someone to win, someone else has to lose - and winning isn't all it's cracked up to be, either. It doesn't have to be that way, it really doesn't. I was in a primary school where there weren't marks or any other form of academic competition, and it was good. I know that if you give kids anything they can use to compete, they will, but you don't have to encourage it. Sadly all schools round here seem to :-(
