[shakermaker]

The system of teaching in 'sets' is just one of the aspects of modern education that I feel leads directly to Ms Neville-Rolfe's complaints. I'm only going off my own experiences but the whole set-up of teaching pupils in different ways, while well-meaning, I found entirely backward. Perhaps it's a different case at other schools (also consider that it's been five years since I left) but there was very little movement between sets throughout my time there.
I was in the 'top set' (for want of a better term) throughout high school, as were most of the class I started with in year seven. One of my good friends in my registration form was in the 'bottom set' (again, for want of a better turn of phrase) from day one and stayed there throughout his secondary education, as did most in his set. We in the top set were encouraged and expected to go on to get A-levels and attend university while those in the bottom set were prepared to take part on vocational courses. Those teaching the bottom set were expecting bad behaviour from the students and this in turn encouraged bad behaviour. Again, vice versa with the top set.
I hate to sound like a sociology text book but this set up leads to self fulfilling prophecies in many cases. Of course there are foundations to be laid at home for a child's approach and attitude towards education but seeing as 11-16 year olds spend most of their time at school, big changes should be made to better craft the future for young people.