* Eunoia JC (EJC)

[DennisB]

lee_yl:

jetsetter:

[quote=\"DennisB\"]To let you in on more info on the forthcoming \"dialogue\" session ..we are told only 150 (75 x 2) parents per school can attend out of approx 900 (450 x 2) parents per school. We have given feedback that every parent has the right to attend since the session is about our children's future but no response so far.


Another agitating thing about the session is they will select who is confirmed to attend and give us notice by 20 May. Beats us why they should select. Even those of us who submitted our request immediately after application for a place to attend cannot be assured of a seat just as yet. Really frustrating and smacks of high-handedness!

Nah, most likely it's cos MOE Edutorium at Level 4 has limited seating capacity of 500 (quite standard for ministry auditoriums). http://www.moe.gov.sg/events/seminars-for-parents/transition-to-secondary-education/.

Selection - don't forget they must ensure EQUAL distribution of Voices from each school. Sinoboy correctly reminded us it's 2:1 mah, cannot be 75% attendees from 1 school, right?

If only 150/school, then submit 1 parent/household will do. Why need both hubby and wife of 1 child to attend? You can benefit more families by releasing the spots. Tell those who got 2 spots to release back to MOE?

On 20 May, check who's been shortlisted. Are they willing to walk up and take the mic and ask questions, or just want to sit there and listen?

Anyway, 7.30-8.00pm - most likely u'll listen to their presentation and explanation first.

8.00-9.00pm - most likely Q&A session, so must coordinate among yourselves so no time wasted on whining.

9.00pm ends - MOE book Edutorium till 9.00pm, thereafter no more central air-conditioning (I suspect).

I wonder what would be the criteria for the selection of the parents to attend the briefing? Will those who signed the petition be selected since they are the most vocal and have their reasons to feel aggrieved? Or will this same group be left out again for the same reason?

MOE did mention that another session would be arranged if there is enough demand.[/quote]
We suggested using a larger venue since all in all about 1000 people attended in the last new principal briefing for the 3 schools combined. The next session might go into June holidays where a number of families are going away. Also I know amongst the affected parents, some who have signed up offered to give up one of the seat but the reply was cannot Liao. Hope moe is reading this forum so they can reconsider the way they arrange this event and provide enough places.

[sinoboy]

zeemimi:

jetsetter:

[quote=\"sinoboy\"]
If you don't mind please also post those comments asking to transfer directly to an IP JC of their choice or transfer directly to the IP JC nearest to their homes to show what these people are really asking for. If you bother to read through all the comments, most of them seem to prefer or demanding Bishan...

What? 全跑光，Mt Sinai 岂不变空城？！ :slapshead:

Wah liddat, 不离不弃忠臣 loyal stayers must be rewarded with PW 100% A, and a couple of PSC and President Scholars (My \"dark\" forces at work again!) to thank them for their unwavering support and faith in the school! :yikes: :siam:

But their T-score must first and foremost qualify for the IP JC of their choice, so as to be fair to those who worked hard to get into those B-Mountain schools requiring higher T-scores. I read some got >260, so mebbe they can have the option.

There's cohort cap too, otherwise will impact on teacher:ratio in those coveted IP schools, no?! Don't forget over-crowding too.

Why must be IPJC har? All jc at yr 5 & 6 all teach the same stuff, whether ip or not. If distance is an issue, then look at jcs near home besides RI, like Anderson, yishun, innova for those staying in the north. It's so glaring, RI is the only IPJC in Bishan. VJ is out. HCI or NJ, that's not very far from mt sinai .....

Duh ... PW, my pet peeve. JS, can get that abolished within these few years?[/quote]Why IP PC? You read the petition comments lor. They say actually their child can qualify for any IP one, but choose this IP. Since there is problem now and there is no solution they should be transferred to another IP JC of their choice or near their home.

Read the comments. Quite insightful. :xedfingers:

[TTBCOOL]

zeemimi:

jetsetter:

[quote=\"sinoboy\"]
If you don't mind please also post those comments asking to transfer directly to an IP JC of their choice or transfer directly to the IP JC nearest to their homes to show what these people are really asking for. If you bother to read through all the comments, most of them seem to prefer or demanding Bishan...

What? 全跑光，Mt Sinai 岂不变空城？！ :slapshead:

Wah liddat, 不离不弃忠臣 loyal stayers must be rewarded with PW 100% A, and a couple of PSC and President Scholars (My \"dark\" forces at work again!) to thank them for their unwavering support and faith in the school! :yikes: :siam:

But their T-score must first and foremost qualify for the IP JC of their choice, so as to be fair to those who worked hard to get into those B-Mountain schools requiring higher T-scores. I read some got >260, so mebbe they can have the option.

There's cohort cap too, otherwise will impact on teacher:ratio in those coveted IP schools, no?! Don't forget over-crowding too.

Why must be IPJC har? All jc at yr 5 & 6 all teach the same stuff, whether ip or not. If distance is an issue, then look at jcs near home besides RI, like Anderson, yishun, innova for those staying in the north. It's so glaring, RI is the only IPJC in Bishan. VJ is out. HCI or NJ, that's not very far from mt sinai .....

Duh ... PW, my pet peeve. JS, can get that abolished within these few years?[/quote]Why not VJC? There are some of the affected parents like me staying in the East and VJC is the nearest JC to my home. Based on the information provided by MOE and the trust and confidence we have in MOE, despite the distance, we had finally decided to choose the new IP JC even though my child's PSLE score is eligible for all the IP schools in the East. But now, my trust and confidence in MOE are badly shaken by this change of event and wonder will the new IP JC be ready for the pioneer batch?

[DennisB]

Learning from our founding PM, Lee Kuan Yew in reference to the style of government


"Under promise and overdeliver. Say less and do more. What you promise, you must deliver and more."

[lee_yl]

Back to the issues on hand. What are the options available to the affected parents?


1). Interim site

A). Since this is the root cause of the delay, this could be the solution too. With 2 more years to go, can the renovations at Malcom Rd site be expedited to complete by 2017? Since MOE is open to extensively refurbish the Mt Sinai site, why not spend its resources, time and energy to assist SJI in their renovation instead?

B). Revive and explore possible alternate sites as altersuch as the old ITE AMK as an interim site. Unless they have other plans for the site, if not, I am not sure how different it is from ITE Bishan.

2). Permanant site

A). Information about the permanent site should be as transparent as possible. What if after the soil analysis, the site is found unsuited for high-rise buildings? What are the contingency plans (including alternate sites) that MOE has in mind? MOE should be upfront and share the information clearly.

3). Alternatives

A). Should parents have a change in mind about the new IP JC, can they be allowed to opt out since there is misrepresentation by MOE resulting in parents and the students being misled to choose this IP program based on undeliverable commitments?

Some ideas for sharing and constructive discussion.

[woodgrove]

lee_yl:

Back to the issues on hand. What are the options available to the affected parents?


1). Interim site

A). Since this is the root cause of the delay, this could be the solution too. With 2 more years to go, can the renovations at Malcom Rd site be expedited to complete by 2017? Since MOE is open to extensively refurbish the Mt Sinai site, why not spend its resources, time and energy to assist SJI in their renovation instead?

B). Revive and explore possible alternate sites as altersuch as the old ITE AMK as an interim site. Unless they have other plans for the site, if not, I am not sure how different it is from ITE Bishan.

2). Permanant site

A). Information about the permanent site should be as transparent as possible. What if after the soil analysis, the site is found unsuited for high-rise buildings? What are the contingency plans (including alternate sites) that MOE has in mind? MOE should be upfront and share the information clearly.

3). Alternatives

A). Should parents have a change in mind about the new IP JC, can they be allowed to opt out since there is misrepresentation by MOE resulting in parents and the students being misled to choose this IP program based on undeliverable commitments?

Some ideas for sharing and constructive discussion.

:goodpost: it is about solutions and options to remedy a broken commitment.

[iRabbit]

sinoboy:

If you don't mind please also post those comments asking to transfer directly to an IP JC of their choice or transfer directly to the IP JC nearest to their homes to show what these people are really asking for. If you bother to read through all the comments, most of them seem to prefer or demanding Bishan...

Prefer and demand are 2 separate things. Let's not lump them together. I would also prefer Bishan if I have a choice. Didn't read the petition but I assume what you implied is factually correct.

I think those who are indeed demanding transfer directly to the Bishan sch bcoz of this debacle, are indulging in wishful thinking. MOE will not, and cannot set such a precedence.

But let's not tar everyone who is affected with the same brush, just bcoz some of them made outrageous demands. Let's be fair to the rest, can?

[woodgrove]

DennisB:

Learning from our founding PM, Lee Kuan Yew in reference to the style of government


\"Under promise and overdeliver. Say less and do more. What you promise, you must deliver and more.\"

No one says it is easy to be a leader. The highest paid government in the world needs to live up to its words. Our founding PM shaped this by ensuring promises are kept. Hope the next-gen leaders can keep it up!

[zeemimi]

TTBCOOL:

Why not VJC? There are some of the affected parents like me staying in the East and VJC is the nearest JC to my home. Based on the information provided by MOE and the trust and confidence we have in MOE, despite the distance, we had finally decided to choose the new IP JC even though my child's PSLE score is eligible for all the IP schools in the East. But now, my trust and confidence in MOE are badly shaken by this change of event and wonder will the new IP JC be ready for the pioneer batch?

Cos a lot of complaints is about students staying in the north, too far to travel to holland area. I would assume it would be even further to travel to the east.
If you stay in the East and opted for this ip program, despite being able to qualify for other ip prog in the East (dhs?) , it would mean you are willing to travel. The distance factor is not to your favour.
It looks like you should hv followed your gnawing doubts and instinct and change ip school last year.

[phtthp]

zeemimi:

Why must be IPJC har? All jc at yr 5 & 6 all teach the same stuff, whether ip or not. If distance is an issue, then look at jcs near home besides RI, like Anderson, yishun, innova for those staying in the north. It's so glaring, RI is the only IPJC in Bishan. VJ is out. HCI or NJ, that's not very far from mt sinai .....

Duh ... PW, my pet peeve. JS, can get that abolished within these few years?

It has to be an IP JC : because the affected pioneering batch students are Sec 3 this year.

If these affected students wish to transfer out to another JC, has to be done before the JAE students come in, so as to avoid competition head on with JAE students, armed with O level results.
If transfer take place before JAE students take O level : then only IP JC can accept their transfer , like (RI, HCI, NJC, VJC, etc), cannot be the non IP JC, since accept Transfer done before O level (by JAE students)


from past record : for those who performed very well at O level :
many (SNGS Secondary girls, Catholic High boys) after O level, usually head to Hwa Chong, for A level. There are also some that end up in RI, but if compare RI & Hwa Chong (these 2 schools), more tend to end up in Hwa Chong, than RI.

Coming from a SAP school : they suit Hwa Chong better, bec of culture wise, as compared to VJC.
Not so many tend to choose Victoria JC (located at Marine terrace, near Marine Parade), unless they happen to stay in the east. But if they stay in the north, travel fr north is east is far & inconvenient, thus unlikely to choose VJC.

Who tend to choose VJC, for A level ?
Tend to be those Cedar Sec girls who had sat for their O level, or those O level students staying in the east, studying in other Secondary schools. Like Anglican High, Tanjong Katong Girls Sec, Ngee Ann Sec, etc