This makes sense in the context of the following conversation, with DH's cousins (they are librarians, very bookish... but I have a PhD, so you wouldn't expect my kids to be complete turnip-brains, either).
We were talking about expected standards of achievement, and she said "I only just found out that by Year 2 they should --"
"Oh no!" I said, dreading that it would something that my own DS has no chance of achieving.
"-- only be able to count to 15", Cousin finished. I was very relieved, DS1 can almost do that now (tends to miss out number 13). Cousin was clearly taken aback, thought I should be appalled to, and said that she worried that her own boys would be very much too bored in school.
Am I not being ambitious enough for my child? How do I know if he truly is making satisfactory progress? Given the previous discussions when it was agreed that school reports don't usually tell parents the honest truth about low-achievers. Do I have to wait for the SAT results to get an objective comparison?
And if DS is so behind (which he seems to be, compared to many NT children discussed on MN, & by this Cousin), then why did DS's teacher tell me that she had "no concerns whatsoever" about his progress?
I honestly don't know if we are too unambitious for our children or getting it "about right"....
This also links into extra-curricular activities; how important are they to overall development? My kids are just too tired to do school/preschool and structured activities outside of school; I honestly don't get how other people's little kids do so much (gymnastix, swimming, multi-sport, drama, etc.). I am afraid though that my kids are going to fall far behind on extra-curricular stuff, too....