Superselective grammars - how defined?

[Tillory]

I am curious and wondered what this term means as I have seen it used a lot and just watched someone describing a selective grammar school vs a superselective one ...is it based on taking top 5% or 10% academically as opposed to top 25% or based on sheer number of applications to places (which could be skewed if very wide catchment area)?

Are the ones that do a competitive 11+ (as opposed to a qualifying 11+ pass) encompassing a large catchment area so described?

Is it only the top ten or top five grammar schools in the country based on grades or Oxbridge entry or much wider than that?

[DontCallMeBaby]

I think officially it's simply that super-selectives have no catchment (or possibly a very wide one), and no sibling rule, so naturally the bar to get in can get very high indeed, especially if the school is deemed good enough for people to travel some distance.

More colloquially though, round here it's the one that's the only one in town, very well-regarded and very competitive, that gets referred to as super-selective, rather than the ones in the next town.

[SanityClause]

For a grammar, you just pass the test, then places are given in a similar way to a comprehensive - siblings, proximity and so on.

For a superselective, the scores are ranked and places offered to the highest scoring candidates, first, down the list, until there are no places left.

[Clavinova]

Where I live the super-selective grammars have over 1,500 children sitting the exams as literally any child can gain a place if they score highly enough whether they live 3 miles away or 300!

[Lemonsole]

It's the grammars that have no effective catchment, and for which coming in the top 120/150/180 candidates is the only criteria for entry.

Sometimes you see the priciest private schools referred to as "superselectives", although it should always be remembered that they are only superselective within that tiny subset of people who can afford at least £20 grand a year on school fees. Which isn't quite the case for state grammars...

[IndiansOnTheRailroad]

It's all about having no catchment. So, you can live anywhere, do the test, and if you are in the top however many places there are, you're in. There are grammars in bucks and possibly kent that describe themselves as superselective but they still operate some kind of catchment so they aren't really. I think the Tiffin schools get 1500-2000 kids sitting their tests (although one of them - can't remember which one - has now implemented a catchment area so can't describe itself as superselective now. Although I bet it still will). Obviously the posh schools describing themselves as superselective aren't. Except in terms of finances.

[senua]

It's the grammars that have no effective catchment, and for which coming in the top 120/150/180 candidates is the only criteria for entry.

Agreed, and what applies round here. They have about ten applicants for each place which - considering that applicants are self-selecting, thus weaker pupils do not even apply - is a ridiculously huge number. The selection tool is a very blunt instrument; it doesn't need to be that good when you are dealing with those sorts of numbers.
Their Oxbridge tally, and even their A Level results, aren't that impressive. They take on extra pupils at sixth form and obviously aren't very expert at spotting the good 'uns.

[IndiansOnTheRailroad]

Some superselectives have decent results and Oxbridge tallies.

[IndiansOnTheRailroad]

Our superselective has as the 'pass mark' for each paper the score of the 120th candidate (after adjustment for age where applicable - that doesn't apply to English, and maybe not even maths). Then they rank everyone in order. And the top 120 overall get in. It is possible to come in the top 120 on two papers and still not get in. It is entirely possible that some, maybe even many, of the kids who don't get in the top 120 for at least two of the papers would be deemed 'of selective ability' if testing for other schools. Because it's all about the ranking, not the mark.

[ISAmum1]

A few superselectives have catchments. Our local girls grammar has a catchment area which is 9 miles in a straight line from its front door. The top 160 scorers in the catchment are offered a place - if they put it down. The local boys grammar has no catchment though - you can live anywhere in the country and gain a place on score.

I would still consider the girls grammar to be superselective. Around 800-900 take the test for 160 places.

[ChunkyPickle]

Hold on.. sibling rules for grammar schools? I've never heard of that before (and I went to one)

How on earth does that make sense?

[ChunkyPickle]

Aaaahhhh - OK, that makes more sense. Thanks Tiggy

[IslaValargeone]

Sibling rules, really?
I've never seen anything that would suggest that.

[JuliaScurr]

yes, Medway is like Tiggy 's example
but some kids with super selective scores go to regular grammars

[IslaValargeone]

I know there are several regions with grammar schools.
My dc is in one.
I'm astonished that some have sibling rules. I thought the whole point was it was decided on ability, like you say, understandably one would presume that was the case across the board .

[talkingnonsense]

A sibling that doesn't pass wouldn't (usually ) qualify to get in- its a second thing, like pass then distance, pass then sibling, pass then children from certain areas, type rhing.

[IndiansOnTheRailroad]

ISAMum - our grammar is the only grammar school in a 50 mile radius. But obviously in a less densely populated area than London.

[IndiansOnTheRailroad]

Tiggy And the minute a school introduces criteria other than top score wins is the moment it stops being a superselective. Not that it matters, obviously. Especially to the cohort and the parents - who probably love the sibling or distance criteria (once they have got one child in or if they love really close).