Anglo-Chinese School (Primary)
-
The Editorial in Lianhe Zaobao this morning for reading.
https://www.zaobao.com.sg/forum/editorial/story20230224-1366335 -
Consider the scenario of school ABC(P) and ABC(J) in Hougang estate and ABC(P) is going to relocate to Pasir Ris, leaving ABC(J) behind in Hougang for merger later. Similarly, if an exception is being proposed and considered for alumni for ABC(P) currently living in Hougang estate within 1km of the school for the enrolment in Phase2A in 2030, is that giving privilege to the privileged?
When we look at an issue, we have to stand in a position of no prejudice. Discrimination for the underprivileged is bad, so is discrimination for the privileged. We have to work within reasons. It’s really odd, waking up every morning, being an alumni and living within 1km of the school you used to go to and raised funds for, and have to send your own children to a school in another location 30 mins away when the school is still operating there.
By the way, I am no stakeholder in this discussion at all, coming from a purely neutral standpoint.
Of course, even granted this wish, parents have to consider if it is good to put their kids to grow up in an environment with kids of homogeneous backgrounds or diverse backgrounds. This should be left as their individual choice because everyone has their own living conditions to consider as well. If they have old folks to send to day care and young kids to send to school, their choice of school based on distance would be pretty clear. Just my 2 cents worth. -
-
sushi88\" post_id=\"2098861\" time=\"1677207385\" user_id=\"100857:
ACSJ and ACSP have always been treated as different schools when it comes to P1 enrollment, it's just like PLMGS and MGS or the CHIJs etc. What is happening now is that ACSP is moving out of Barker and ACSJ is taking over the campus.
Consider the scenario of school ABC(P) and ABC(J) in Hougang estate and ABC(P) is going to relocate to Pasir Ris, leaving ABC(J) behind in Hougang for merger later. Similarly, if an exception is being proposed and considered for alumni for ABC(P) currently living in Hougang estate within 1km of the school for the enrolment in Phase2A in 2030, is that giving privilege to the privileged?
When we look at an issue, we have to stand in a position of no prejudice. Discrimination for the underprivileged is bad, so is discrimination for the privileged. We have to work within reasons. It's really odd, waking up every morning, being an alumni and living within 1km of the school you used to go to and raised funds for, and have to send your own children to a school in another location 30 mins away when the school is still operating there.
By the way, I am no stakeholder in this discussion at all, coming from a purely neutral standpoint.
Of course, even granted this wish, parents have to consider if it is good to put their kids to grow up in an environment with kids of homogeneous backgrounds or diverse backgrounds. This should be left as their individual choice because everyone has their own living conditions to consider as well. If they have old folks to send to day care and young kids to send to school, their choice of school based on distance would be pretty clear. Just my 2 cents worth.
As we all know schools get relocated all the time, and every relocation will certainly bring about inconveniences not just to parents, but also teaching staffs. So why should ACSP be treated differently when it comes to relocation? And why should ACSJ parents agree to let ACSP alumni gain access to ACPJ P1 enrollment just for the sake of minority's convenience while at the same time compromising their ACSJ's enrollment chance due to the risk of oversubscription? -
Veyron\" post_id=\"2098868\" time=\"1677208614\" user_id=\"30663:
Think you have missed my point. I am not advocating that ACS(P) alumni gain access to ACSJ P1 enrolment. I know that the alumni affiliation is almost out of question..
ACSJ and ACSP have always been treated as different schools when it comes to P1 enrollment, it's just like PLMGS and MGS or the CHIJs etc. What is happening now is that ACSP is moving out of Barker and ACSJ is taking over the campus.
As we all know schools get relocated all the time, and every relocation will certainly bring about inconveniences not just to parents, but also teaching staffs. So why should ACSP be treated differently when it comes to relocation? And why should ACSJ parents agree to let ACSP alumni gain access to ACPJ P1 enrollment just for the sake of minority's convenience while at the same time compromising their ACSJ's enrollment chance due to the risk of oversubscription?
From 2030, the enrolment is still ACSP as ACSP will exist at both locations until 2033, then the merger happens. Also ACSJ parents do not have to agree to anything, it will be decided by MOE. Besides, the sample of alumni living in the current area NOW enrolling in 2030-2033 may not be a big number, let MOE do their own assessment. -
Zeal mummy\" post_id=\"2098807\" time=\"1677163743\" user_id=\"58173:[quote=\"Zeal mummy\" post_id=2098807 time=1677163743 user_id=58173]
If a new Methodist girls’ sec school is set up in Tengah, then he is not wrong to say ACSP Tengah girls will soon have affiliation to one of the Methodist Girls’ school.
I don’t think he has MGS in mind. There are a number of Methodist schools for girls.
Methodist Girls’ School
Fairfield Methodist School (Secondary)
Geylang Methodist School (Secondary)
Paya Lebar Methodist Girls’ School (Secondary)[/quote]
Same thing what, if push ACSP Tengah girls to say, PLMGS Sec (instead of MGS Sec), then a portion of the PLMGS Pri girls will not be able to make it back to PLMGS Sec due to the 80% affiliation cap rule. -
Hendon\" post_id=\"2098867\" time=\"1677208543\" user_id=\"142376:
A good one. I’ll be sharing this with my son.
CNA Heart of the Matter podcast
https://omny.fm/shows/heart-of-the-matter/acs-move-the-start-of-dismantling-closed-circles/embed?share=0&download=0&description=0&subscribe=0&foreground=000000&background=ffffff&highlight=bd1338&style=artwork%22 -
zac's mum\" post_id=\"2098887\" time=\"1677212554\" user_id=\"53606:[quote=\"zac's mum\" post_id=2098887 time=1677212554 user_id=53606]
very interesting podcast. do you know which study was this that recommended the abolishment of alumni priority? i wonder how much the govt will consider these recommendations.
A good one. I’ll be sharing this with my son.[/quote] -
doodbug\" post_id=\"2098892\" time=\"1677214368\" user_id=\"13281:
SOCIAL MOBILITY PERCEPTION SURVEY REPORT 2022
very interesting podcast. do you know which study was this that recommended the abolishment of alumni priority? i wonder how much the govt will consider these recommendations.
https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/624de77559304cc99b818879/6374c53a67753f3ff4c85046_Social%20Mobility%20Perception%20Survey%20Report%202022.pdf
by an organisation called Access Singapore (website: https://www.access-sg.co/) -
lee_yl\" post_id=\"2098880\" time=\"1677210824\" user_id=\"17023:
If this were to happen,
If a new Methodist girls’ sec school is set up in Tengah, then he is not wrong to say ACSP Tengah girls will soon have affiliation to one of the Methodist Girls’ school.
Same thing what, if push ACSP Tengah girls to say, PLMGS Sec (instead of MGS Sec), then a portion of the PLMGS Pri girls will not be able to make it back to PLMGS Sec due to the 80% affiliation cap rule.
then
obviously,
PLMGS P6 primary school girls will not be happy.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login