MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[limlim]

Well.. your mileage may vary..


but from personal experience.. doing P1 reg, there was 2 choices for me, A & B. Went to A, tried to submit application.. but while waiting, was told that all < 1km has to ballot.. that means, for my case 1~2km, no need to try already.. So in the same afternoon, I went to B school which is <1km and submit application.

And, happens that there is no ballot.. so my kid got in.. and 2nd got a place too.

And, I'm really glad that it was B that they're studying now.. coz in terms of logistics and everything.. this works out best for us. can't imagine the nightmare and disaster that might result if it was A that they got in instead........

So.. I fully support the sibling priority and distance priority.. as IMHO, that is really in the best interest of the child's educational needs.. (and parent too.. )

2km might not seems much for an adult (perception of distance).. but for a P1~2 kid.. it might appear like Changi to Jurong to them.. :evil: :evil:

It may not make a difference to you.. but in general, distance does hv impact to most.

[SAHM_TAN]

DesertWind:

Siblings priority - get rid of this!

Why you give siblings priority for?
If we keep the alumni priority, then ALL your kids can get into the school using the parent's alumni priority. There is hence no need for siblings priority.

Furthermore, is it very important for all siblings to be studying in the same school? Not really right? Same school but different sessions also different mah? Wear hand me downs? No right?

Anyway, to illustrate an example, one friend's kid was in a neighbourhood school but at P3 got into a GEP school, famous brand-name girls school! Then subsequently her younger sister went into P1 using siblings priority. Is it fair? One more place taken away from those who stay nearer to the school. So imagine the cross-migration every-year from GEP students to GEP schools. Their siblings also ride on the coat-tail get into these schools. Fair??

I have 3 kids. My alma mater is a girls' school, so it's out for DS. The school is way too far for my DDs too, so it's out for them too. Dh's school is no longer around.

My DD1 is now in a neighbourhood school. If there's no sibling pirority, and if they don't get to be admitted into the same school, I will go mad with logistic issues. I have no helper or car. I cannot split myself into 3 to ensure that my kids are in school on time and pick them up during dismissal. The schools in my area (not including those branded or single gender hor) are single sessions.

I no money to employ helper or get a car hor.

[phtthp]

you can never please everyone.


just be mentally prepared that if 2B and 2C were to get more seats, likely to \"snatch\" from phase 1 and 2A. How else to \"forced\" let go more seats to 2B, 2C ? So there may be cap for phase 1 and 2A, to let go the seats and give to 2B, 2C. Parents inside the 2A group already very angry and pissed off - esp. 2A alumni from the 9 GEP schools ! The hornet's beehive nest for 2A is been disturbed. Is like someone shoot a lighted up burning fire arrow with kerosene into the beehive nest. All the bees swarm out in danger, lost their home.

[Daddy D]

I reckon MOE is planning this P1 reg review cos' all schools will go single session in 2016?

Less vacancies... More upset parents...
The earliest batch to be affected could be 2014 reg?

How come MOE never ask parents for feedback?
Or MOE policy makers think they know best?

Then we can only hope for the best!
:celebrate:

[phankao]

phtthp:

is only that they set a maximum cap.
phase 1 will still remain. just that they may also cap phase 1 (sibling scheme) - because phase 1 constitute the highest proportion of kids so far. if they cap phase 1, then more seats can be released out to 2B, 2C who are the ones that complain.

Why cap phase 1??? That means the government would be telling us that they don't want each family to have more babies??? So must keep at max \"2 is enough\" again, har????!!!! Prefer to take in foreigners to boost population instead?

[phankao]

Daddy

I reckon MOE is planning this P1 reg review cos' all schools will go single session in 2016?

Less vacancies... More upset parents...
The earliest batch to be affected could be 2014 reg?

How come MOE never ask parents for feedback?
Or MOE policy makers think they know best?

Then we can only hope for the best!
:celebrate:

I still think it should be to refine the alumni scheme - (A) limit to those only from that primary school and not those from secondary, for example. There's probably other criteria - eg. (B) only 1year in that school cannot count. , etc, etc. (C) contributions to the primary school during their years there.

[Laura02]

I agree that there’s no pleasing everyone. And everyone see things differntly.

From my perspective, giving alumni propriety should not be totally abolished. Yes, there are sleeping members, but there are some very active alumni members who really contribute to the school. Please don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. So perhaps there should be priority only for alumni who do a minimum number of hours of volunteer work for the school.
And I would not like to abolish priority for families with links to the school too. Some religious organizations help their affiliated schools raise funds, many provide and/or support "pastorial care". And it’s the achievements and successes of their former students that make popular schools popular.
Giving priority by proximity alone would only serve to drive up the prices of homes near to the school. Many of these popular schools already try to take in a mix of students from both wealthy and less well to do families. A purely by proximity system would only tile this balance towards well off families.
Personally, I feel a sense of belonging and connection to the past knowing that I studied in the same school my grandmother studied in. Similarly, I am passing on this tradition to my dd by having her study in my school.

[laughingcat]

Daddy

I reckon MOE is planning this P1 reg review cos' all schools will go single session in 2016?

Less vacancies... More upset parents...
The earliest batch to be affected could be 2014 reg?

How come MOE never ask parents for feedback?
Or MOE policy makers think they know best?

Then we can only hope for the best!
:celebrate:

I hope so it will not implement this year or next year. Coz PV for next year is already close now and it wouldn't be fair for those patents who are going to clock the PV hrs for next year.

[laughingcat]

phankao:

Daddy

I reckon MOE is planning this P1 reg review cos' all schools will go single session in 2016?

Less vacancies... More upset parents...
The earliest batch to be affected could be 2014 reg?

How come MOE never ask parents for feedback?
Or MOE policy makers think they know best?

Then we can only hope for the best!
:celebrate:

I still think it should be to refine the alumni scheme - (A) limit to those only from that primary school and not those from secondary, for example. There's probably other criteria - eg. (B) only 1year in that school cannot count. , etc, etc. (C) contributions to the primary school during their years there.

Are you sure the current policy takes in secondary? That is not true right? All along i am thinking the policy only considering primary school.

[limlim]

Laura02:

Giving priority by proximity alone would only serve to drive up the prices of homes near to the school.

so?






Say, no priority by distance, everyone same priority. Some schools 1000% over subscribed (desirable?).. some alumni stay in Changi send their kids to School in Bukit Timah.

Is this \"In the best interest of the child's education needs\" (assuming all schools are the same)?

prices of home going up near some schools.. is this even under the jurisdiction of MOE?? MOE has to look after a child's education needs.. do they have to step in 1 leg to try and control/limit housing prices also?

How they got there (near popular schools), and what is the result of them being there.. is this the concern of MOE? Or, they are already there.. what is best for the child's needs is of greater concern to MOE?

If that school is in wealthy areas.. maybe, the school can be relocated to somewhere near to, but not 100% surrounded by, wealthy areas.. This would provide a mix of the wealth level of the students, while still taking care of the needs of the students.