* Eunoia JC (EJC)

[sushi88]

mashy:

They will be attending the JC campus when they are 17-18. Not when they are 15. The 15 year olds will stay in the SNGS, CAt high or SCGS school compound. Surely 17-18 year olds are fully capable of taking public transport?

If they need to voice their concerns, it is now right? Once everything is cast in stone....what good is there for them to complain about the travelling distance? :?

[sinoboy]

sushi88:

Also, for us unaffected, why are we so frustrated unless as taxpayers we are affected? Then I would say the Mt Sinai site will dig more into our pockets than the Bishan ITE site considering the amount of work they have to do to the Mt Sinai site. So assuming we look at it from the angle of a stakeholder, we should support them to try to find a better solution.

I don't see how taxpayers will be badly affected by this. :scratchhead: Mt Senai is the cheapest solution if you compare asking SJI to vacate early and let Bishan JC move in. There will be duplicate retrofitting and moving. But Bishan JC move into Mt Senai only one retrofitting and moving is needed.

Regarding Mt Senai shuttle bus issue, it should only badly affect a small group of current batch students perhaps those living in Bishan or AMK area who is expecting to walk to take a short distance bus to the Bishan campus. Most SC are chauffeured to school so I don't think they'll complain that much.

I think the issue is to ask the authorities concern to admit and rectify their mistake and let the affected Bishan JC students transfer to another IP school prefably in Bishan vicinity? Because other solutions like asking LTA or SJI to change plan is unrealistically unrealistic? :scratchhead:

[25HMOM]

sushi88:

Perhaps if we break down the issue to look at it, we can appreciate it better from the affected people's views.


If day 1 they were told holding site would be at Mt Sinai while building the Bishan site, there might not be an issue...everyone went in with their eyes open.

However, they were told Bishan ITE was the holding site. Some people might have moved their residences to Bishan thinking everything is happening in Bishan...the sacrifices might have involved uprooting some other people in the family.

I believe this is where the straw broke the camel's back.
So they should be given a forum to air their frustrations.
I do not think they are finding the opportunity to transfer to any other IP schools but perhaps more like checking if they could occupy the Bishan ITE site instead.

To me, the ideal solution is for SJI to speed up their own campus work and move back in time for the 3 schools to go to the Bishan ITE holding site. That only puts pressure on the construction at SJI site to speed up. The refurbishment of the track and field at Mt Sinai is not trivial plus renovating some of the other facilities and millions need to be spent on a holding school (that is after spending millions renovating for Henry Park). If they cannot get the site up for them to move in by 2016 end, it will be a triple whammy for the govt.....by then, setting up this JC would also be deemed a failure.

http://www.stcommunities.sg/education/j ... ew-jc-2017

I do not read the above explanation, ideas and proposals in the e-petition. The latter gives me an impression of expediting the completion of the new JC building so that their kids could enjoy the state of the arts new facilities besides convenience of travel, of course. This is solely my personal interpretation. :xedfingers:

For those who have relocated to Bishan, I am sure most of the affected pupils are from CHS and by then, they would have enjoyed 4 years of residing near their sec sch. Not all effort are wasted.

After 2 years in JC, the families will probably have to relocate again if they wish to enrol in NUS, NTU or SUTD if convenience is their top priority.

[jetsetter]

sushi88:

Also, for us unaffected, why are we so frustrated unless as taxpayers we are affected? Then I would say the Mt Sinai site will dig more into our pockets than the Bishan ITE site considering the amount of work they have to do to the Mt Sinai site. So assuming we look at it from the angle of a stakeholder, we should support them to try to find a better solution.

Haha, ss88...I've been waiting whole week for someone to say this. I wrote a post on this to question the authorities, but I deleted it as I didn't want to add salt and pepper...\"Extensive rejuvenation\" - hmmm...

[sinoboy]

pirated:

I noticed that ACSI the top IB school is in Dover, top boys school is next to a columbarium sharing an access gate, top girl school in Anderson, Dunman High in Tg Rhu, VJC in marine parade .... Bukit Timah only has HCI and NYGH & NJC ....and no one else .... do I miss out others ?

You missed out RV high in Boon Lay. But it doesn't mean that others not named are not good schools.

[jetsetter]

sinoboy:

sushi88:

Also, for us unaffected, why are we so frustrated unless as taxpayers we are affected? Then I would say the Mt Sinai site will dig more into our pockets than the Bishan ITE site considering the amount of work they have to do to the Mt Sinai site. So assuming we look at it from the angle of a stakeholder, we should support them to try to find a better solution.

I don't see how taxpayers will be badly affected by this. :scratchhead: Mt Senai is the cheapest solution if you compare asking SJI to vacate early and let Bishan JC move in. There will be duplicate retrofitting and moving. But Bishan JC move into Mt Senai only one retrofitting and moving is needed.

Regarding Mt Senai shuttle bus issue, it should only badly affect a small group of current batch students perhaps those living in Bishan or AMK area who is expecting to walk to take a short distance bus to the Bishan campus. Most SC are chauffeured to school so I don't think they'll complain that much.

I think the issue is to ask the authorities concern to admit and rectify their mistake and let the affected Bishan JC students transfer to another IP school prefably in Bishan vicinity? Because other solutions like asking LTA or SJI to change plan is unrealistically unrealistic? :scratchhead:

It's Mount Sinai, Sinoboy:)

[mashy]

sinoboy:

sushi88:

Also, for us unaffected, why are we so frustrated unless as taxpayers we are affected? Then I would say the Mt Sinai site will dig more into our pockets than the Bishan ITE site considering the amount of work they have to do to the Mt Sinai site. So assuming we look at it from the angle of a stakeholder, we should support them to try to find a better solution.

I don't see how taxpayers will be badly affected by this. :scratchhead: Mt Senai is the cheapest solution if you compare asking SJI to vacate early and let Bishan JC move in. There will be duplicate retrofitting and moving. But Bishan JC move into Mt Senai only one retrofitting and moving is needed.

Regarding Mt Senai shuttle bus issue, it should only badly affect a small group of current batch students perhaps those living in Bishan or AMK area who is expecting to walk to take a short distance bus to the Bishan campus. Most SC are chauffeured to school so I don't think they'll complain that much.

I think the issue is to ask the authorities concern to admit and rectify their mistake and let the affected Bishan JC students transfer to another IP school prefably in Bishan vicinity? Because other solutions like asking LTA or SJI to change plan is unrealistically unrealistic? :scratchhead:

The other IP school in Bishan is RI. I guess the parents who suggested this are hoping that they will strike lottery and get their kids there if this pulls through. It is a lot more difficult to get into RI IP program. If they are having so much problems with going Mt Sinai, transfer school. My guess is that those who are complaining can't go anywhere else. The scorers aren't deterred by distance. And even if they are, any school will welcome them with open arms.

[cherryc]

sushi88:

mashy:

These aren't young children anymore. The parents should simply take a step back and let their kids grow in this. If the kids themselves don't like the idea, they will organize something to voice it out. No point having the parents make a hoo ha over it. They are 17-18 years old elites. If they still need to be led by the nose at this age, their education has gone to waste. It will just appear silly if it gets to the media. I can assure you the feedback from the general public will be nasty. For the sake of your children, it's best to keep this down among the parents.

Yes I agree they are not young children but..
The affected students are currently 15 years old(not 17-18) and in the midst of their mid year exams. I have been thinking the past few days if the parents or the students should be involved. My conclusion is both. Students can continue to give feedback to the schools after their exam on the issue in a mature way and parents can directly feedback to the authorities.

I am personally unaffected by this but I can see why they are frustrated. I suppose some parents who voiced out with heavy words and wrong rationale may spark off some discussion. But let not that noise overshadow some genuine and valid concerns. Stay quiet and you will hear the real sounds.

Also, for us unaffected, why are we so frustrated unless as taxpayers we are affected? Then I would say the Mt Sinai site will dig more into our pockets than the Bishan ITE site considering the amount of work they have to do to the Mt Sinai site. So assuming we look at it from the angle of a stakeholder, we should support them to try to find a better solution.

Good post. Yes we are taxpayers and hence stakeholders in this issue and questioning if this is an oversight of any party is deemed reasonable.

From reading the comments of the petition, I am also puzzled why after 5 years there is no name for the new jc. It is like you are 5 years old and your parents have not named you, a simple act can show their efforts and support put in you.

I was affected way back in 1987 having to move to Woodlands for my jc but there was no doubts no complaints then. However, my ex schoolmates who are parents of the affected IP kids now are the ones seeking for the accountability and missing links in this whole saga. If it is not solved and clarified, further delays and waste of taxpayers' money is foreseeable.

[sushi88]

sinoboy:

sushi88:

Also, for us unaffected, why are we so frustrated unless as taxpayers we are affected? Then I would say the Mt Sinai site will dig more into our pockets than the Bishan ITE site considering the amount of work they have to do to the Mt Sinai site. So assuming we look at it from the angle of a stakeholder, we should support them to try to find a better solution.

I don't see how taxpayers will be badly affected by this. :scratchhead: Mt Senai is the cheapest solution if you compare asking SJI to vacate early and let Bishan JC move in. There will be duplicate retrofitting and moving. But Bishan JC move into Mt Senai only one retrofitting and moving is needed.

Regarding Mt Senai shuttle bus issue, it should only badly affect a small group of current batch students perhaps those living in Bishan or AMK area who is expecting to walk to take a short distance bus to the Bishan campus. Most SC are chauffeured to school so I don't think they'll complain that much.

I think the issue is to ask the authorities concern to admit and rectify their mistake and let the affected Bishan JC students transfer to another IP school prefably in Bishan vicinity? Because other solutions like asking LTA or SJI to change plan is unrealistically unrealistic? :scratchhead:

Good question you ask. The Mt Sinai track and field is completely in a wash-out state at this point of time. It is major work to redo the track and field which was why it was left untouched when the primary schools needed to occupy them, firstly, more time more money and not so required by primary schools. Having said this, ANY SCHOOL without a field for kids to run freely is quite a torture for the highly energised people. They ended running in the hall or gym, only indoor running with a lot of boundaries.

No double retrofitting, SJI should move back to own campus and if really need to go Mt Sinai, what RGPS vacate for them should be good enough if it is just a short stay. Does Bishan ITE need retrofitting?

I am not sure about asking SJI to speed up their task at hand is unrealistic. Any details on that?

As for transfer to other IP schools, that is definitely not feasible as the implications are even more complex than logistical ones.

[pirated]

lee_yl:

I said most, I didn't say all top schools. Those schools you quoted: HCI, NYGH, NJC, VJC, Dunman High, Anderson..... Isn't it true the cream of the cream are indeed all along Bukit Timah?

Wah I didn't realize Tg Rhu, Marine Parade, Anderson Road are all in Bukit Timah. Must be GE coming they redraw the boundary again