Should all Grammar Schools be super selective?

[StressedaboutUni]

Rather than offering places based on living in a catchment area, surely grammar schools should simply admit by highest ranking? This would prevent local schools from losing all their bright pupils as some would not get into the grammar of it was purely based on ranking score. For example in Barnet, QE boys purely admits on highest ranking and all the local schools are doing really well compared to the average secondary school in England.
In addition, it would make Grammar schools even more meritocratic as you don’t need to live in the (often expensive) catchment area to get in.

The problem is that the KS2 national curriculum is insufficient for the needs of any but lowest performing able bodied students.

Are you sure? So those pupils who go on to true comprehensives in non-grammar counties based only on this ‘insufficient’ National Curriculum and then get 8s / 9s / A* A levels etc don’t exist? Or have somehow been taught ‘11+ tricks ‘ (because that is what they are, not really a full curriculum) and thus are successful despite rather than because of their KS2 curriculum?

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-primary-curriculum

The primary curriculum us, I would agree, woefully short of detail in Art, PE, Music, Drama and this very school-dependent - but those are not tested at 11+?

It's not the only way. I could never have afforded tutoring but I did buy a £10 practice book for DS and he got into a superselective.

Let’s be real here, grammar schools are no longer about nurturing ‘bright’ (whatever that means) kids, if they ever were their in the first place.
Most kids who go to grammar schools, have extensive tutoring or have lessons at prep school. I find the latter, especially annoying as state schools are banned from teaching 11+ material. To quote Animal Farm: “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others”. This definitely sums up state selective education.

I agree with the general premise that making the grammars more selective (i.e not top 25% but top 5%) would make the secondary moderns better and more like comprehensives as a larger proportion of bright pupils would attend them. I also agree that the only way to accomplish this for the Kent Grammars is by widening the catchment.

The other points around fair access arrangement are all valid too. If the system was being revamped I agree that all grammar schools should reserve places for pupil premium children (based on national percentages not local) and admit the highest preforming students in that category via their own stream.

It’s also worth bearing in mind, btw, when looking at the ‘output’ of grammars, that by A level not all - often as few as 2/3, maybe less - of the results come from pupils who have been there since 11+.

Many grammars have sizeable intakes after GCSEs, where they hoover up those with high results from non-grammars and from private schools (especially with the change in focus of highly selective universities away from private school pupils - this sometimes backfires as unis generally look at where GCSEs were taken). The grammars also quietly ‘drop’ those who have been there since 11+ but haven’t gained the kind of GCSE results that the school would like.

Definitely worth asking probing questions about how many leave and arrive at sixth form, and the average A level grades of those who start at 11 and those who start at 16 before deciding that grammars genuinely offer the best chance of academic success from 11.

@cantkeepawayforever hardly any leave the grammar my DS goes to. Those that do usually go to the exceptionally high performing sixth forms in London (e.g. Brampton Manor). Of those that join, must are girls who attended the local all girls grammar school and prefer co-ed for sixth form.

I'm in Gloucestershire where we have superselectives. It turns the whole thing into a nonsense. Kids have to get on coaches for half an hour + to a different grammar when they live down the road from their local grammar, but too many outsiders have taken places there. Kids commute from Birmingham and Bristol to Pates in Cheltenham. Madness. What a reward for a bright hard working child - a horrible commute every day for 7 years and not living near any of your friends. This year has been particularly bad - the council have had to create a lot of new comp places at short notice as so many of the grammar places have gone to out of county applicants.

“the council have had to create a lot of new comp places at short notice as so many of the grammar places have gone to out of county applicants.”

This is certainly a good argument - that grammar schools are part of general local education planning and no one LEA can absorb all the brightest students from surrounding counties without budgetary and other impact

Gloschick, that’s interesting. So Gloucestershire is paying twice for the same school places - once for the grammar school place that is in their county but not occupied by a county child, and once (over the odds) to create unexpected places in non-grammar schools?

Or does a child from out of county bring their funding from their ‘hone’ county? My guess would be not? It would certainly be a reasonable incentive to set a catchment area?

@Intergalacticcatharsis I do think there is such a thing as being gifted but I do agree with you that the grammar tests aren't an assessment of that. They are crystallised knowledge and success is only partly attributable to intellectual potential. Tutoring, quality of primary school, parental involvement and other socioeconomic factors all impact who does well.

It is also nonsense to open up additional free school meal places to kids travelling in from afar because typically that means expensive bus/train fares and an expectation for parents to travel in once in a while for performances/parents’ evening. The parents of kids on free school meals tend to not be able to afford public transport fares and expensive blazers. So unless government or the school fund that it is a non starter and all for show.

@cantkeepawayforever school funding on a per pupil basis from central government. Coming from out of county has no negative impact on school funding arrangements.

I heard tell a couple of years ago of a minibus driving a group of kids from Southampton each day to go to Pates in Cheltenham.
I think the "county of Gloucestershire" might be a more reasonable catchment than literally anywhere.

@Intergalacticcatharsis pupil premium kids wouldn't have to travel more than they want to. It would be open to those that apply in full knowledge of what's involved. Its just that the places would be reserved for all those that do who perform best amongst that specific demographic.

But the capital costs of creating the places?

@Intergalacticcatharsis the uniform at my DC’s grammar is cheaper than our catchment comprehensive which has a ridiculous uniform including specific shirts with embroidered logos. The grammar also has a big supply of donated nearly new uniform which parents can take free of charge for their children. This includes football boots. Parents evening is once a year.

Stop the press! I just checked the local superselective grammar’s admissions page and they are introducing a 30 miles catchment area from 2024-25 academic year!
This is such great news for local pupils.

Currently ‘abnormally abled’ kids are defined as those who excel in all core subjects. I wouldn’t expect to see kids who weren’t excelling in essays and mathematics.

That tends to be because many State Grammar kids go to private for A Levels because, as has been said previously, universities only search for ‘state applicants’ at GCSE level.

@cantkeepawayforever central government pays for capital funding as well which is allocated via application

Is that right, though?
a) does the 11+ currently correctly select for such ‘all round’ pupils

b) should schools for those so able they cannot be efficiently educated in a trye comprehensive only accept those with uniform profiles? Arguably, isn’t it possibly even more important that children with exceptionally ‘spiky’ profiles have the special education appropriate to their needs? (In the same way that current Special Schools do not require their pupils to be equally disabled in all areas of their lives)

(Sorry my repky was to @Wenfy )

I have worked in grammar schools and personally I feel they should be abolished. In ones I have worked in I would say 85%-90% of students have come from a private and/or tutored background. You can always tell the heavily tutored kids in the first 6 weeks as the parents have stopped all the tutoring as soon as they got there place and they are left to sink in a highly academic school. Parents who have sent children to private primary have no qualms about saying they only did it to get in the grammar and save the fees for secondary private. You then probably have the correct 10% who are just naturally very gifted, who have great parents and who will be fine wherever they want.

Abolish the grammar system and you will then bring up others schools in the local area. Not skimming off the top 2% etc.....

Thanks for that clarification. So Gloucestershire will be fully funded in advance for this September for the additional costs of the additional places they have had to create?

The grammars in Kingston, whilst super selective, do still have a catchment area. I think the outer catchment is 10 or 15km.