Super selective grammar change to catchment selective - why?

Sorry, I misunderstood the comment about reading being like barnet and so standards would drop (ex barnet resident). The catchment is still huge and would mean some girls having an hour commute each way. The old head used to advise against it as they are expected to do several extra curricular activities. There will still be as many girls as bright getting in - there are hundreds usually on the same cut off score and places are allocated by distance then. To be frank, I'd say 90% of the current girls are in the new catchment anyway. I think it's a much fairer system as local kids more likely to get into a local school, but it will probably affect v few kids.

Do you mean why a catchment for 11+ but not one for 16+? Well sixth forms don't have catchments, lots of kids join my DCs comp for sixth form.
The one girl I knew who dropped out was commuting 26 or so miles.
I just think a long commute plus homework might be too much, if the catchment is reduced to 15 miles, it shouldn't make much difference (you could ask the school for the statistics on how many girls come from outside that area).

I do know of one girl who was commuting 30+ miles for all of her secondary career, to a comp. I think she would have done better if she'd gone to a more local school, as she would have been less tired, had more chance to be fully involved in school life and even had time to be tutored if she'd needed it.

It is probably because the school is envisaging a change to being an academy in a few years where they will be free of LEA control but will have to counter that by organising their own school transport and admissions. I suspect this will become quite common.

Talkinpeace- are you near Winchester? I only ask because I saw the catchment maps for the 3 comps in Winch which were certainly 'blobs'! My DS is at Th. in Ch. Fd. which has a more or less oblong catchment- withe the school sitting hard by the further eastern most point of the rectangle! Admittedly, the M3 forms that 'barrier' and teh catchment is pretty much continuous, unlike teh Winch schools!

As for 'super selectives'- I have never understood how local tax payers allow them to exist. Whilst it might be said that if a school takes the top 2-5% from a massive area, it shouldn't affect the remaining schools in the town, I think it does, to be honest. I recall reading the OFSTED of a Salisbury school a couple of years ago where the inspector said, in as many words 'Though this school calls itself a comprehensive, by definition it cannot be in a city that contains academic selection. It is therefore a Secondary Modern' (-then went on to praise it highly as such.) I know of DDs who travel 40 miles each way to go the the girls GS in Salisbury as it's catchment is 'a reasonable travelling distance'- but of course, 'reasonable' is a variable commodity if the alternative is £12,000 pa for private fees.

I, being a cynic, believe super-selectives continue to be allowed to flourish, blind eyes naturally being turned to the intensive Prep schooling and tutoring industries around them- for political reasons. They look great on paper.

Incidentally, I don't know the definition of 'super selective' but I image it'd be having no or very generous catchment and taking the top 2-5% of possible 11+ takers. Anyone know? Or is it just a term bandied around? To me, 'super-selectives' don't for instance, take the top 20-25% of DCs. They're 'ordinary GSs'.

I live in West Kent. Our local grammars are super selective and attract many from outside the borough. It annoys me greatly to see places go to non kentish pupils and local children having to travel as far afield as Sittingbourne and Faversham to attend a grammar school. I don't have much sympathy for those out of catchment for Kendrick.

I have known students drop out of Kendrick in year 7 because the commute is too much.

The Wokingham catchments won't now be changing in the way that pissed off the Reading parents, though - the Adjudicator ruled against it, and the Maiden Erlegh governors accepted that (even though they are now an academy). Has anything changed since then?

When DS went to Reading School over 10 years ago, they didn't have any designated area, but the then head did urge parents not to send day boys who lived a long way away though he didn't specify how far; when they brought in a designated area it was pretty wide - looks like Kendrick are now doing the same.

The lack of a boarding option is less relevant now that Reading School only take up to 12 boarders a year- when DS was there it was up to 20, but I don't think they ever actually had the maximum afair there were about 7-8 in DS's year.

Our superselectives are non catchment. It's a pain I reckon. It skews the applications and makes the competition huge for the local kids.

I can only surmise the stress kids are put under when they live not only a commuter distance (i decided that 1hr mas the max travel I felt was appropriate) away but all over the country and the plan is "we'll move if PFB gets a place" . Not only does PFB spend all primary career preparing for and doing exams, maybe all over the country but the family then uproots and moves and the pressure to "prove" it's the right school continues all the way through "see what we did for you to get a good education" etc etc

The decision for boroughs to support state grammars or not is made by the borough. If I lived in a borough that funded state grammars, and that grammar was part of the provision for education in that borough, I would be pissed off to see the majority of places going to children from far and wide.

The 'no catchment' grammars skew the level of ability needed to get in, leaving out many perfectly able children who are at general grammar level but who live in the borough.

I wonder why state grammars have not always had a catchement or proximity criteria.

(this is an objective view - I do not live in a grammar area, nor am I trying to get DS into one of the long-journey-away super selective grammars closest to us)

round here we are (from September) going to have the school bus for one school 4 miles away picking up from outside the gate of another school
that has to be mad
also my kids school catchment is in two blobs and the other school has a long thin catchment between the blobs - it would make more sense to give each of them half the circle
and TBH with more academies and thus less LEA schools, county boundaries should no longer impact on distance from school calculations

So they are going to discriminate against rural families ...?

I don't agree with circular, nearest-the-school-gate catchments. That's how you get over-priced housing keeping ordinary folk out of good schools. It's much better to have weird-shaped catchments that include rich and poor areas.

Maybe because the carbon footprint of getting the kids to and from superselectives is going to be taken into account by funders in future?

Our LEA is looking long and hard at transport costs for schools and I can see some anachronistic catchment boundaries being shaken up over the next couple of years

parental choice is great but the fuel costs !!!

I honestly can't see where the OP mentioned poverty, mumsneedwine. Am I being very dim?

Whoops, meant 30 mins away. Sorry

The new catchment is massive. We live over mins drive away and are still in it and it goes a long way in every direction. Think they've done it as shortage of places for local kids, and also wonder if it's got a bit to do with Wokingham council changing their catchments. Oh and just coz kids are poor doesn't mean they are not bright or motivated so not sure how that would affect the standards !