well, in truth, I'm quite happy NOT to have it - believe me, it's stressful enough without! Cnnot imagine what I'd be like if had more subjects to fret about. And, it's me
fretting, not him, of course. He's blithely unaware and playing with his Lego
What I meant, given that I doubt that (not being rude
) Essex children are any cleverer than Gloucestershire children, and given that a measurable outcome, the league tables (since both admission test and the spewing out the other end, the GCSE/A level results, are intelligence/academic) have them all as much of a muchness, then I wonder at why the Essex children have to go through so much more rigorous a system in the first place.
Agree entirely about league tables per se. The positions I vaguely quoted were, I think, for the university entry thing, rather than A level / GCSE - don't know how they vary according to the criteria being applied, not massively I guess, since all on a version of academic achievement.
They can only ever be used as a guide, one arrow among many in the quiver of choice since they only even tell a partial story. At KS2, for instance, when, at our state primary, the figures were 97% 97% 97% since the class had 33 children in it, everyone knew who, the one person was, who stopped it being 100%. Awful for him and his parents. Stupid.