I really appreciate ablity grouping, in theory. I think that logically, it seems to make sense in all levels of education. However, the common problem with this type of idea (as we've all seen time and time again) lies within the gaurantee of a proper implementation. Even throughout highschool, I feel the majority of our classes were structured at different ability levels. Our highschool had the IB program, and unless you were on track do graduate with an IB diploma, most students (including myself) steered away from the intense academic program. These students had classes on a completely seperate hallway, and honestly, the rest of our grade rarely saw the IB students. However, non-IB students ( I really hate labels) were allowed to take this awesome class called "Theory of Knowledge". It was probably one of the most amazing classes I had, simply because we had such a great random sampling of students. We were all there simply to study how humankind defines "knowledge".
I completely agree with rachel when she says that there should be a balanes when it comes to ability grouping, however I also agree with Jim's point that it only reinforces a heirarchy in education. Yet, I honestly feel that because I took that TOK class my senior year, i was surrounded by students who were each well-developed 'products' (for lack of better word) of their 13 year experience with ability grouping. I feel that it was these diverse viewpoints that made our class so dynamic.
long story short, I still have no clue where I stand on this subject. Big surprise