With the Olympics over, we return to a more normal pattern, and to more familiar August headlines. And nothing is more comfortingly predictable than the annual A level results media merry-go-round. As tens of thousands of teenagers nervously await their fate, I dare to anticipate what the stories will be.
There will be concern over the dumbing down of the curriculum. There will be questions over the efficiency and competence of the exam boards. There will be analysis of higher tuition fees and whether they deter applications to university. There will be suggestions as to how the whole system could be better; there will be a comparison of the merits of the IB to those of A level. There will of course be the odd variation - the ability of universities to increase their quotas of students with AAB grades will add a bit of spice - but essentially we will revisit the old chestnuts . . . again.
And, of course, we will worry about the supremacy of independent schools. The League Tables will be published and will be dominated again by private institutions. The general picture will be clear enough but it will be even more enhanced in certain statistics: the number of A* grades; the numbers going on to leading universities to study Maths, Sciences and Languages; the disproportionate Oxbridge entry. Independent schools will punch well above their 7% weighting in the market. Politicians will wring their hands; experts on 'social mobility' will be wheeled out in front of the cameras and we will all agree that 'something needs to be done'.
But hang on. Leading figures describing it as a disgrace that independent schools should be so dominant . . . sound familiar? The President of the British Olympic Association, Colin Moynihan re-ignited the debate two weeks ago when he described the fact that 50% of gold medal winners in the 2008 Beijing Olympics came from independent schools as 'wholly unacceptable': true, the statistics from London 2012 are less stark (a mere 32% of medal winners this time), but they are still far from representative.
How do we seek to get the message of sport for all to the next generation to ensure that all important 'legacy'? First, we pour extra resource into the elite end of sport and ruthlessly expect top performance and then bask in the glory of success. A sort of trickle-down theory; a Thatcherite approach to sporting economics. And the British people seem to enjoy it. Second, we encourage more genuine sport in schools - as opposed to the now infamous 'Indian dancing' - by copying what independent schools have always done and continue to do.
I was particularly struck by the comments of the all-conquering British Cycling team. When asked what made them so successful, they simply referred to the 'aggregation of marginal gains'. Not rocket science they said, but simply doing everything a little bit better, an ethos of always trying to improve. Of course, the 'system' tried to stop them: in 2009, the powers that be in cycling introduced rule changes - new events and entry quotas - designed to prevent a team dominating the sport as much as GB had in Beijing. The result: we did even better . . . and the other countries are moaning again. Am I alone in seeing an analogy with education here?
Some simple solutions emerge to the age old issues in the education debate that we will rehearse again this week. Worry less about fiddling with the system and realise that improvement comes through hard work, doing the basics well and an ethos of ambition. Recognise that copying best practice is a better route to success than bemoaning it. Radically, consider whether targeted investment in elitism (selection, access to the right environment, encouragement of the best institutions with a track record of success) might work in education as well as sport. do we honestly resent Helen Glover's gold medal because she went to Gordonstoun?
The legacy of the Olympics is vitally important and we would all love to see continued success at Rio and beyond; we would all love to see an increased participation in sport across communities and the age range. But it pales into insignificance compared to the importance of an educational legacy. And, sadly, the legacy of the annual education 'olympics' has been shocking for years. Perhaps 2012 could be different.