"I could never send my dcs to grammar school....

[winkywinkola]

...because I think it's unfair on all those children who can't get in because they couldn't afford tutoring for 11+. But I will send them to prep and boarding school."

I was a bit perplexed to hear this from a mum at the school gate. Aibu?

"Bertrand going way back but in answer to your question: yes it is a super selective and a good one at that but good L5s are the benchmark. Of course the school doesn't require more than good L5s.". This doesn't make sense. It can't be a superselective if the benchmark is level 5- that's the benchmark for a Kent type "ordinary" grammar.

"Bertrand wholly misrepresents our parental body"

In what way?

I think all she means is that children don't need to be L6 - not surprising if not all primaries do them.

But you do have to be at level 6 for a superselective. The clue is in the name......! If you 'only" had to be at level 5 it would just be a grammar school......

And then we come back to super selectives being the schools for the top few as they're designed to be.

They don't just have to be l6 they have to be L6 at the start of year 6/end of year 5

Well I'm sorry to disappoint you Bertrand but the benchmark is L5 whether you like it or not. Admittedly you need to be hovering around the higher L5s by preference but that what it is. It makes complete sense because it's a fact. Some schools do better with their intake than others. As other posters have observed, some grammars are rubbish and perform far less well than the good comps. That's probably particularly true of counties such as Kent where it's a 'system'. Also, the cut off mark for entry has remained remarkably steady for years and years so it's not to do with falling rolls in primaries or anything of that nature which might decrease competition - in fact numbers applying have also remained steady despite falling rolls in local primaries. Anyhow, fact.

A superselective is determined by a lack of any defined catchment. It is not in any way determined by a particular level. It is a superselective and the DC do not require L6 to be in with a shout, good L5s are just fine. Nor does it cater for the top 2% of the population only. Bertrand I've no idea where you get these ideas from but I do think you like to repeat and repeat until you not only believe them yourself but get others to believe them too.

In terms of the parental body, you always characterize parents at grammars in a particular middle class well heeled way and the plain fact is (at our school anyway) that the parent body is vastly more diverse than you'd have people believe, which is obviously good - but doesn't support your prejudice.

ConfuciousSay nonsense.

I should add that it's generally at the top of the league tables too, unless there's a technicality to explain a blip.

Not nonsense. It is highly competitive to get into a super selective and the pass mark is invariably higher so you need the extra edge so high L5 or L6 is required.

My Y9/ L5 child is scoring 8s and 9s already on the new GCSE measure in all subjects except one where she's only a 7 :( Thank goodness she has two years to go....

Confucious I know absolutely for certain what I'm talking about. Glad you've now backtracked to include 'high L5' :) At our school it's a good L5 by the end of Y6, not the start.

This kind of nonsense is a real discouragement to DC from homes which think the superselectives are for genius kids. But I think that's why some people on MN spout it - gets rid of some competition.

I guess it depends on the school as to where the grade boundaries are. My dcs school you need to be in the higher group (entry mark is near full marks on the 11+) whereas another school in the county a 40% pass mark on the same test gets you in.

"n terms of the parental body, you always characterize parents at grammars in a particular middle class well heeled way"
Interesting that you are refusing to give the % of FSM children at your school.

"My dcs school you need to be in the higher group (entry mark is near full marks on the 11+) whereas another school in the county a 40% pass mark on the same test gets you in." What county's that?

The biggest unfair advantage as regards Oxbridge is going to a private school.

The most recent data set was online this week but it wasn't very satisfactory. However it is typically the case that state school applicants are more likely to get in once they apply.

Also, I can't find the statistics for admissions per qualified student. Admissions of home students are roughly 50/50 state/private, compared to 90/10 or something nationally. But it could be that students achieving AAA or better are 50/50 nationally anyway. I want the data!

I'm not refusing at all to give the number of FSM DC. You can look it up yourself! I'm not prepared to get it wrong and then have you picking away because I'm out by one child! I do know that it mirrors the number of FSM DC attaining good L5, which is an important point. But just as Carl says Oxbridge can only do so much to help DC at poor quality schools reach appropriate levels to have a reasonable chance at getting in, so too the secondary schools have to rely on the primaries doing their bit for DC in this group achieve well. That's a different issue but can't be laid at the door of grammars, very many of whom have access extremely high on the agenda.

"This kind of nonsense is a real discouragement to DC from homes which think the superselectives are for genius kids. But I think that's why some people on MN spout it - gets rid of some competition."

Au contraire, goodbye. I would imagine that people are in the process of hiring private detectives to track you to find out where this undersubscribed superselective is!

to achieve well.

They're welcome although they're not entitled to link me with a particular school on these boards, since I've never once named the school my DC attend, nor do I intend to.

"You can look it up yourself!"

Happy to- but I was assuming you wouldn't want to give me the name of the school.

Bertrand it's not undersubscribed, I never said it was. It's oversubscribed, as you'd expect.