Seriously though, why ARE some state secondary schools allowed to select a proportion of their intake? And I'm not talking about religion here.

The thread header says you aren't talking about faith schools so what are you talking about? Grammar schools? Or schools that select by aptitude?

Grammar schools only exist in some areas of the country. No new grammar schools can be set up.

Schools selecting by aptitude are a legacy of a period when schools could select one or more specialist subjects in return for which they would receive additional funding and be allowed select based on aptitude for that subject. No more than 10% of the intake can be selected on aptitude.

What sucks even more is the amount of lying and manipulation by schools which goes on, and the ruthless way they do their utmost not to have to take children with difficulties

This is often alleged but there is no way a school can do that in the normal admissions round. They simply get a list of candidates to place in order using their admission criteria. The LA will then decide who gets a place. The school does not get references from previous schools, nor does it get to see the child's records. The LA would be likely to catch any obvious manipulation of the list and appeal panels would overturn any attempt to exclude someone who qualified under the admission criteria.

Because unless the school are above national averages (which isn't possible - half off all schools HAVE to be below average!!) AND seen to improve results EVERY year regardless of the make up of the cohort, the head teacher and staff are under constant threat of Ofsted catagory, which means capability procedures and losing their jobs

Rubbish. Schools do not have to be above national averages, nor do they have to improve results every year to avoid being under threat of being placed in a category of concern.

Non cheating, not mom
Cheating !

I don't blame any individual parent who takes up the opportunities presented to them, though, if they do so in a straightforward mom-cheating fashion within the system. Why shouldn't they ?

inimitable
Why do you think they behave like that?
Because unless the school are above national averages (which isn't possible - half off all schools HAVE to be below average!!) AND seen to improve results EVERY year regardless of the make up of the cohort, the head teacher and staff are under constant threat of Ofsted catagory, which means capability procedures and losing their jobs.

And I think the situation is exacerbated by the parental frenzy, and a level of lack of understanding about the difference between good results and a good school.

As it happens I am very happy with my closest comprehensive, a good school that serves students if all abilities well, so I am lucky.

Yes, it does suck. What sucks even more is the amount of lying and manipulation by schools which goes on, and the ruthless way they do their utmost not to have to take children with difficulties in case they mess up their league table position.

But mintyy's point is that within the state system some people have choice and others do not.

From my address if I had a very high achieving girl and was religious I could choose from a super selective grammar, a faith school, a girls school or a co-Ed comprehensive. If I had an averagely bright boy and no faith my choice of state Ed is the comprehensive.

Any means of selection, academic or faith , usually serves as an extra opportunity for some, not a genuine choice for all .

Not really. Why should those without the financial means to pay for it, have less choice in the Secondary school system?