Choosing a secondary school for your child is a big decision and my heart went out to the parents in The Big School Lottery programme (Tues 7th September 2010), who all clearly wanted the best for their children. But how can a system that supposedly favours the wealthy really be fair? It is clear that parents who lived in the affluent areas of Birmingham got the choice of the best schools and they also had the income and time to tutor their kids to pass the 11+ plus. As one parent put it: "We have the ultimate choice - the best grammar schools or an independent school".
The Big School Lottery programme offers an insight into one of the most important and stressful decisions a family can make - which secondary school to send their child to.
I must put in the caveat that I most definitely rank among the middle classes and have chosen a house that is in a good catchment area for a secondary school. And being in the catchment area for a good state school would certainly remain at the top of my list when house hunting. I feel extremely fortunate to be in that position and who wouldn't do the same for their children if they could?
But I am also interested in other systems for selecting school places that are fairer and read with interest about the Brighton and Hove lottery system for school places when it was announced two years ago. However, I was disappointed to learn last week that the experiment had not worked. According to the report, it did not help more disadvantaged students; it wasn't really a lottery system and was still predominately based on catchment areas with only spare places being put in a lottery system for students.
I came from a family that firmly believed in choosing a school that suited each child, which meant that I went to grammar school, my sister to a comprehensive and my youngest sister to an independent school. My sisters were both moved from schools my parents tried and found weren't suitable for them. Sadly that option isn't open to everyone.
Proponents of grammar schools would say that those who are poor but academically gifted would get a chance to go to a good school but it was clear from the programme that where you live can seriously limit your choice and potentially your child's future.
When I look at my eldest I wonder if we should we tutor her to try and get in to a grammar school. She is bright but loves dancing, drawing and many other activities. If we stretched her academically to get in to such a school, would she struggle once she got there? Could this damage her self-esteem? Would it not be better to send her to the local comprehensive where she can excel in subjects like dance but also be streamed in subjects she finds challenging. Should she go to the all girls comprehensive in our catchment? Or the mixed co-ed school, to be more balanced socially?
These sorts of questions are being asked by parents across the country but if education is only determined really by where you live, how much money you earn or how bright you are - what are the choices left for all the other children who don't have these privileges?
Education is changing and the government announced 16 free schools on Monday, the question remains how will the places in these new schools be allocated?
According to a recent Daily Telegraph article many top comprehensives are even more selective than grammar schools, also favouring the middle classes. It cites a report by the charity the Sutton Trust that claims the only fair way to select children for new schools is by random ballots to stop them being dominated by children from middle class families.
But also suggests it could be in "conjunction with other criteria, for example ability, faith or location". Isn't this what they tried to do Brighton and Hove?
Perhaps the only true egalitarian thing to do is to try and improve all our existing schools, rather than diverting time, money and attention away from the education system we already have.
Claire Winter is a member of the BBC Parent Panel.
The Big School Lottery continues on Wednesday, 8 September at 9pm on BBC Two.