Why a combined A-level and IB headline needs unpacking

The pathway and the examination takers are different counts

For 2025 the held crosswalk records 182 A-level pathway pupils and 183 actual A-level takers. Its note explains that one IB-route pupil also sat an A level. The unique candidate total is 235; adding the two route-taker counts would count that person twice.

None of these pupil counts is the denominator of a grade-entry percentage. A-level entries count subjects taken at A level; IB Higher Level entries count Higher Level subjects. The school-defined combined band uses those entry populations, not the sum of pathway pupils.

Read the native result inside each route

The held native A-level A* percentages are 45.6% in 2018 and 50.75% in 2025. The current eligible endpoints support a higher later A* share.

The IB Higher Level grade-7 percentages are shown separately. They describe another qualification and cannot be substituted for an A-level result. A school-defined combined headline may be useful as a record of how the school presented its results, while still being unsuitable for a strict native A-level comparison.

A changing mix can conceal as well as magnify

A combined headline depends on both the results within each route and the number of entries contributed by each route. A shift in those weights can make its movement differ from the movement inside either route. That is a reason to inspect the components, not permission to treat A* and Higher Level 7 as educationally identical.

The table retains the published combined figures alongside the native components. It does not reproduce the pooled-window decomposition given in an earlier version of this analysis or invent a new adjusted result. A claim about how much of the change came from weighting needs a separately specified and reviewed calculation.

The current record qualifies the recent-run claim

An earlier version of this analysis described a recent sequence of A* shares above a threshold. The current comparison excludes KCS’s 2023 A* measure, and the retained publication is marked as source-disputed. That row remains visible as evidence, but it cannot support an unqualified continuous-run conclusion.

Route choice, subject mix, intake and assessment conditions can all matter to these aggregates. The observed route counts and grade shares do not establish better teaching or the result a particular future pupil will obtain. The next useful question is what the school offers within the route and subjects that pupil would actually study.

Supporting evidence and limits

Open a record to inspect its full definition, publication references and the scope of any checks. A source reference alone does not verify a figure.

1. King’s College School, Wimbledon · 2018 · A-level and IB published crosswalk · 2018

   People following the A-level pathway, distinct from all pupils who sat an A level. IB-route candidate count; not the denominator of A-level grades. School-defined A-level A* / IB Higher Level 7 crosswalk, not native A-level A*.

   Source references or checks are recorded, but verification of this particular figure against the original is incomplete.

2. King’s College School, Wimbledon · 2025 · A-level and IB published crosswalk · 2025

   People following the A-level pathway, distinct from all pupils who sat an A level. IB-route candidate count; not the denominator of A-level grades. School-defined A-level A* / IB Higher Level 7 crosswalk, not native A-level A*. Includes the IB-route pupil who also sat an A level; do not add this count to IB candidates to obtain a unique cohort. The held unique-pupil total, distinct from the overlapping route-taker counts.

   Source references or checks are recorded, but verification of this particular figure against the original is incomplete.

3. King’s College School, Wimbledon · 2018 · A-level results · 2018

   A-level-only entry share on its native scale.

   Original-publication checks are recorded for 1 field. This does not verify every field or every interpretation of the record; inspect the field-specific checks below.

4. King’s College School, Wimbledon · 2025 · A-level results · 2025

   A-level-only entry share on its native scale.

   Original-publication checks are recorded for 3 fields. This does not verify every field or every interpretation of the record; inspect the field-specific checks below.

5. King’s College School, Wimbledon · 2018 · IB Higher Level results · 2018

   IB Higher Level entry share on its native scale.

   Source references or checks are recorded, but verification of this particular figure against the original is incomplete.

6. King’s College School, Wimbledon · 2025 · IB Higher Level results · 2025

   IB Higher Level entry share on its native scale.

   Original-publication checks are recorded for 4 fields. This does not verify every field or every interpretation of the record; inspect the field-specific checks below.

7. King’s College School, Wimbledon · 2023 · A-level results · 2023

   The retained field is source-disputed in the current comparison; it does not establish an unqualified three-year run.

   Publications conflict for at least one field. A check of another field does not resolve that disagreement.

• The combined crosswalk is the school-defined published measure, not a universal A-level/IB conversion.
• Endpoint movements do not establish a continuous improvement trend or a causal school effect.