Am I missing something here?

[mumoftwo100]

My eldest daughter is 2, so we are in the position of looking for good schools, and was just browsing the primaries everyone on Mumsnet seems to bang on about, but am i missing something? Although they are made out as the holy grail nothing seems very stellar academically?

Sudbourne, Brixton: average point score 29.9 - 2443 out of 14701 primaries, level 5 38%
Coleridge, Crouch End: average point score 29.7 - 2945 out of 14701 primaries, level 5 38%
Belleville, Battersea: average point score 30.3 - 1592 out of 14701 primaries, level 5 38%
Tetherdown, Muswell Hill: average point score 30.2 - 1762 out of 14701 primaries, level 5 45%
Yerbury, Holloway: average point score 30.0 - 2146 out of 14701 primaries, level 5 38%

I know they're all Ofsted outstanding etcetc (apart from Tetherdown which is only good) but none of them are even in the top 10% of primaries and I would have thought for such a solidly middle class intake they would be doing much better? (I'm not trying to offend anyone dont cut me down!)

Our local primary, Foulds in Barnet's average point score is 31.1 ranking it 527th and has 58% level 5. This seems markedly better but it's not really talked about on Mumsnet so does that mean its perceived as undesirable and I should move to one with catchment hysteria?

Arrgh so much stuff to think about -_-

When I say hard working I mean in the physical sense rather than the bookish sense.

I had the choice between outstanding and good. I went with good on gut feeling that it was right for my ds.
So far so good.
As others have said form your own opinion and visit.

I suppose, in fairness to parents, if they get their children into good schools and the children turn out to be thick then at least they had a chance at education even if they end up being trapeze artists, whereas, if the parents had scrambled to get them into a rotten school (which happened to be next to a circus) and they turned out to be brilliant in all disciplines it would be too late, and doubtless the rotten school would do everything in its power to crush any academic flair the child started off with.

Column....couldn't agree more. Look at Jamie Oliver...driven, focused, love of learning, brilliant communicator, businessman...didn't shine academically at school though. David Beckham, tenacity and determination- used to practice football til half 9 at night. These characteristics are as important as academic qualities. Good schools promote and develop these characteristics as well as a academic development. The parents on here who moan about kids having time 'off' to go to a visit or a pantomime with their school friends miss this point entirely.

I also agree that mumsnet isn't representative if all parents.

We saw a school, state primary, with great results. As soon as the tour was over I knew DD would only go there over my dead body.

It was an exams factory. All joy and fun was pressed out of it. I think only children who learn easily and thrive through pressure may like it there. Oh yes, and if you are good at hockey as well.

She is now on a good school, small and cuddly and thrives as they managed to draw her out of her shell and support her in being a child who has fun while. learning. Result, she is in the top sets of her class without any pressure, just because they make it fun to learn.

I learned fast that results and Ofsted is not everything.

Op I think it might be helpful for you to consider the distribution of results that go in to the league tables. It's a bell shaped curve which means there's not a lot in it between a school in the 30th centile and one in rhe 70th. The biggest factor in ks2 results is socioeconomic. So unless you are choosing a school on the basis of social class alone you need to look beyond the league tables and visit.

We visited a nearby outstanding school which left us cold and sent the kids to a good school where they are thriving academically and socially.