Good news (but confused)

[davidla]

There are 4 primary schools near us. Our DS - 6 years old - goes to one that is probably the 3rd best, but it is one that we think is improving (it got a 3 in its last Ofsted).
Today we got a call from the school that is generally reckoned to be the best primary around here (it gets a 1 on almost everything) saying they had a place for our ds.
So far, so good.
We are quite happy to move him there (but will also talk to ds about it) - and he also has friends in the new school.
However I was looking at Key Stage 2 results and the new school actually has lower CVA and APS scores than his present school.
So how can a school be apparently so much better but get worse results?

[MintyCane]

Because of the intake.

[teamcullen]

cat64 has a good point.
Also things to think about.
Children with special educational needs or a statement may effect sats results
The amount of children where english is a second language
Children who may have missed sats due to illness or holidays
The number of pupils in the school (as this will effect % rates)

[trickerg]

So true cat64. There are so many of these hidden effects within league tables. Even budget in past years can have an effect.

It's the same with the 11+. There was an illuminating set of results in the local paper, which, even accounting for genetic difference, looked as if several schools are full of Einsteins, whilst others are full of pondlife. Such is the effect of 4 years' tutoring.

It's all rubbish - our local Grammars have already kicked out over 10% of the A level group after AS results due to low grades, thereby securing their high position in the league tables next year.

[davidla]

Thanks for the replies. It all seems a bit strange to me but I'm probably too naive to realise what people are doing.
We talked to our ds tonight about changing schools. He asked if the new school would ask harder questions to make his brain bigger. When we said it probably would, he replied with "OK, let's do it!"
Love him!