Opinions of the Primary School Registration System

[1amber]

I think 80+ schools conducting balloting with many within 1km is a tat too many and speaks of a system that needs a major review and overhaul. I cannot agree that it is any longer good for a Singaporean to go around quietly within the system to do what is needed to get your child a place in a popular school. Is it so worthy of respect for a non local to game this? I think there are other things deserving of our respect.


We the citizens of Singaporean have been silent for a long time. Voicing our disagreement should not be taken as whining, complaining. C'mon - calling it xenophobia is overreacting. There have been many constructive ideas put forward in this forum. Because we have been silent and generally bo chap, today we are living the consequences of that apathy.

Yes there are perhaps no perfect system in the world to please everybody but at least can we please ourselves a little more? Because we not stupid too Is it wrong for parents to want the best for their kid?

Yes there are no perfect systems in the world, but could we Singaporeans voice out without being labelled as such and such by our own fellowmen (or are they?)

A house divided cannot stand. So cool it ok! http://i54.tinypic.com/2cnys05.jpg\">

[MumandMe]

MumandMe:

Khordan:

Finally, rather than expect a system that can be fair to the 40,000+ kids who are registering each year (I have news for you, there will never be a system that can be fair to all), I do have respect for those who just quietly go and do what needs to be done to 'game' the system; create chances for themselves in earlier phases through PV, or other routes. Perhaps that's why many consider the new immigrants such a threat. Unlike many Singaporeans who just sit back, complain and expect the Government to fix it for them, these PRs & FTs just go and do what's needed and get what they need. I guarantee you that no matter how you 'stack' the odds against them, they will work out a way to game the system and get the child into the school of their choice.

I read that you are in support of those who game the system. I beg to differ. As PM Lee mentioned, no one system is sacrosanct. While it is true
no one system can please everyone, policy makers must ensure the original system in place is being observed in its true spirit. To me, it is precisely that loopholes are being exploited by those who found a way to \"game\" the current system that it needs to be reviewed. Rules are man-made, and we have to allow for changes to suit the present time.

I am not against the PRs, but it bothers me to know there are many (PRs or otherwise) who rent a place near their schools of choice or make a (false) statutory declaration to increase their odds of getting into the school. This is undeniably a loophole that needs to be addressed. That many PRs fall under the category of those who \"rent a place to be near the school of choice\" is accidental.

Let me include into the Gaming-the-System category one who changes his IC address to that of a relative's or a friend's who stays within 1 km of the school of choice.

[ChiefKiasu]

MumandMe:

Hihi, I think you've misinterpreted Chief's writing. He does not think (at least not totally) the idea of having a \"Singaporeans First\" policy is the best one.

Thank you, MumandMe.

For avoidance of doubt, I am pro-Singapore. I am against anything that can potentially harm the hard-won peace and harmony amongst the different communities in our nation, that most of us take for granted these days.

We should encourage our children to work with children of different nationalities, to learn their strengths and weaknesses, to understand their culture, and to become friends so that we can solve problems together. This is exactly what our children must do to survive in the brave new connected world without borders, where diversity and ability to ride on the unique strengths of each individual's capabilities is the critical success factor. The last thing we should do is to impress upon on our children that as Singaporeans, they have the birth-right to the best things in life, and that anything foreign is always 2nd class. With such an attitude, would our children be able to deal with the new world order, when they may have to work with powerful Chinese or Indian partners in the future?

It is sexy to be able to stand on a platform and proclaim oneself to be \"pro-Singaporean\" and take a nationalistic approach to dealing with issues pertaining to the issuance of limited resources. Politicians do that, because they will get massive support from the ground. Populist policies are much easier to sell because they provide instant gratification. But that also mean such policies tend to be short-sighted, and may create long-term problems that are difficult to fix for generations to come.

I'm not a politician. I'm just a co-owner of a small little website for especially concerned parents. If I take the \"pro-Singaporean\" stance, it would probably help increase viewership since we are almost totally dependent on Singaporean readers, after all. But I would not be able to look at my children in the eye and tell them that they should treat foreign friends as their equals, not when I have helped to close the door on such students.

It is in my humble opinion that the government has mis-planned its manpower policies, and has underestimated the need for time and action to integrate our new foreign-born members into the social fabric of our uniquely diverse community. In other words, we grew too large, too fast. It is the same effect as when a company tries to scale its operations quickly in anticipation of demand, and new staff joining the company are seen by existing staff as being \"parachuted in\" to eat into their bonuses or taking the best jobs which they have been eyeing for years. Companies can do that because profit-making is fundamental motive for their existence. Countries cannot do that because socio-cultural factors are just as important as the socio-economic ones, if not more important. Strife between different cultures will not just lower a country's productivity - it will also create friction between countries which could lead to trade barriers, or even wars.

I would humbly suggest that the relevant agencies immediately tighten their manpower policies and start working to stem the tide of ill-will between SG and PRs. It is really serious situation we are in, if the xenophobic venom that dominates so many social media sites today is of any indication. This is what I would much rather see, than to force our MOE to adopt a protectionistic policy that may create long-term problems as other countries adopt tit-for-tat policies of restricting entry of Singaporean students in their top universities and colleges.

And for avoidance of doubt again, this is my personal opinion. I have nothing against parents who insist on taking the issue up with MOE to adopt a Singaporean-first policy for Primary school registration. It is just that I think you are targeting the wrong ministry.

[janet88]

ASAP:

ngsc23:

Al the best to parents in the forum for the balloting this coming Friday. Maybe i am selfish, we the Singaporeans should have a good National Day gift from our Govt.

All the best.

Look at the boardcast from MOE, almost whole entire Singapore is balloting for a place for P1 registration. :imdrowning: Are we letting too many PR into Singapore ?can MOE MINISTER do something about it? Ie increase the vacancies,Else most parents will meet again in P2C sup or P3 :imdrowning:

This issue is being discussed in another thread \"Opinions\".
Some schools have reduced vacancies and this led to to more parents have to ballot. There should be a clear distinction between Singaporeans and PRs...don't just raise consultation fees at polyclinics or school fees. Do something about the P1 registration. This is MORE crucial.

[benten2011]

Chief is right. There is no point targeting MOE over the PR issue. That would be an issue at the national level to consider. I am confident that following these exercise registration exercise there would be some additional fine tuning done to the current process maybe in favour of citizens. You never know. At the moment we are almost at the end of the core registration process for next year. But moving forward i’m sure there will be additional fine tunning done to the registration process.Lets give the new minister for education a chance to settle into his new role and study the existing data further. I’m sure he will be asked again in parliament about the P1 registration process. At the same time I know a number of parents here are stressed over the ballot thats understandable. Parents like me are even more super stressed as we see more competition for spaces down the road for our kids.

[MumandMe]

Chief, I see eye to eye with you. On the point of PRs and FTs, I agree with MM Lee that they are the leverage which help propel Singapore economy forward. If labour is measured in terms of units as depicted in economics textbooks, then no one is able to deny the PRs and FTs add many units to Singapore's labour force.


I am not pursuing an anti-PRs/FTs agenda here. This is neither the forum and nor the audience for such a topic. Being on neutral ground, I do feel the heat and anger of parents here towards PRs/FTs. I would like to provide some clarity to the topic of PRs competing for a place at popular schools.

Let's take a look at the population growth over the last decade.
In 1990, Singapore has a total population of about 3million with PRs and non-residents making up 14%. The ratio of citizen to non-resident (incl PRs) is about 6:1. Fast forward to 2000. Now, Singapore's total population has grown to slightly more than 5 million. PRs and non-residents make up 36% of the population. The ratio of citizen to non-resident (incl PRs) is now less than 2:1. It is about 1.75:1! It is no wonder we're beginning to feel the many ills and inconveniences of an \"overcrowded\" city.

Although the numbers above may look alarming and even threatening, let's not get carried away. The bulk of non-residents are FTs who are work permit holders and it is not overly presumptuous to assume the number of children under this group is negligible, if not nil. PRs make up about only 10% of the total population. In this 10%, how many are children registering for P1 each year?

Specifically on the matter of P1 registration, the impact of PRs competing for a place at popular schools is not as significant as most think it is. The ones flouting the rules are likely to be fellow Singaporeans.

Source of data on population calculation : http://www.singstat.gov.sg

[benten2011]

Before we start making sweeping statements we should study the data and statistics carefully. There are currently blind spots in the data available. There is a huge influx of PR’s around popular schools. There is no doubt about it. Just visit the condo’s from Novena all the way to Upper Bukit timah and you will see what i mean.

[MumandMe]

Benten, the issue is not how many PRs there are, but how many are 6-year old children?

[ASAP]

Hi all,Since there might be a misallocation of these vacancies to schools which are not popular. Minister of MOE please do something.


ie , Nanyang Pri Sch short fall of 23 vacancies ( 53 children within 1km ballot for 30 places).My dear Minister, please allocate 1 teacher from this not popular school to Nanyang Pri School to create one extra class of 23 student.
This list go on and on for all the Primary Schools that need to ballot within 1km.
Cannot imagine thousand of students unable to study a school near to their home (1km).
Unnecessary time and money wasted, unnecessary physical stress for parent to bring their child to school. (Bus fare, Traffic jam, leaving home very early, reach home very late...etc etc .... :slapshead:

Minister of MOE, Can you hear us......... :slapshead:
More than 60 Primary Schools need to ballot for schools within 1km.
This is no jokes....
http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/admissions/primary-one-registration/balloting/

:slapshead:

[mummyo]

MumandMe:

Benten, the issue is not how many PRs there are, but how many are 6-year old children?

:rotflmao: Correct!