Sir, What works best in British education, to judge by the leadership in David Cameron’s party, in business, in the media and in the arts, is the public school system.

Would it not be logical for him to enable these schools to share their facilities with pupils in adjacent areas? This measure would enhance their charitable status.

Building brand-new schools everywhere is prohibitively costly, so why not be bold? He could engage staff, parents and pupils at public schools to demonstrate discipline, streaming and the expelling of troublemakers, thereby maximising the potential of all students – in a fruitful collaboration with the general public.

Effectively, at present, they remain in splendid patrician isolation from the worries of the rest of us about declining standards. Practical action in education can only radiate outwards: let the Tories strive to make public schools truly public.

ELIZABETH MOLES, Glasgow

Sir, The problem is that the quality of state elementary education has declined so badly that few 11-year-olds, especially from deprived areas, can read, write and calculate well enough to enter academic education.

Grammar schools provide an academic environment in which a bright child will not be intimidated by jeering just for being clever. Nothing can destroy the ambition of a 12-year-old so surely as the disdain of peers. Mr Cameron, of course, has no such experience to inform him.

This is not theory. For many years bright children who had proved themselves interested in learning and hard work were given access to the best education available. They produced an extraordinary number of scientists, engineers, doctors, civil servants and politicians. Many were from the poorest homes and most deprived surroundings. That is not happening now. What is wrong with returning to a proven successful system? Of course selective education is elitist – rightly so. How else are the best produced?

PETER LLOYD, Blacker Hill, S Yorks

Sir, David Cameron is right that parents will not forgive any political party’s ideological self-indulgence on education. Unfortunately, there is little evidence that anything more edifying has driven policymaking in recent years. The current argument over grammar schools serves as a reminder that our education system needs fundamental long-term reform. Such reform can only be led by an independent, cross-party commission, informed by expert professional advice. The leader prepared to establish it would be a political Titan indeed, applauded by parents everywhere.

CLARISSA FARR, High Mistress, St Paul’s Girls’ School, London W6

Sir, I have recently retired after 15 years as a head teacher of secondary modern schools. Rarely have I read such sense on educational matters as when reading David Cameron’s views.

Society now needs the majority of future generations to have initiative and capabilities. We cannot afford to limit the “middle half” of our children by removing them from the role models of the most able and most motivated.

However, Mr Cameron does make one important error, for he believes that funding each pupil equally is fair. It is not. The majority of pupils in grammar schools can be well taught in larger classes than those in secondary moderns. Since the salary of teachers is the largest expense in a school, equality of funding gives such schools a massive advantage.

The party uproar reveals that the Conservatives remain out of touch with the needs of modern Britain. Does he have the ability to change such deep-seated attitudes?

NICK HUNT, Canterbury

Explore Letters

• Feedback