MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[doodbug]

tankee:

phankao:

[quote=\"tankee\"]
Agree that alumni should be retained.

But it is questionable whether it is more important than proximity.

Perhaps the entire phase 2 should be merged. And when there is more applicants than places, allocate in the following way:

Phase 2
1. within 1km
1.1 allocate to alumni first, if not enough, ballot within this group
1.2 if still have places after alumni, allocate to PV, Clans, Religion group, if not enough, ballot within this group
1.3 if still have places after PV, Clan, etc. allocate to those without priority, if not enough ballot within this group

if there is balanced place, then proceed for 1-2km in the same order, and there after > 2km in the same order.

This doesn't sound much different from the current practice, leh.

it is about putting proximity over the rest (alumni, PV, etc) while respecting current priority between them.[/quote]Under this proposed scheme, for the popular schools, I think alumni who live >2km will have no chance of entering the school, even if they volunteer.

[limlim]

3Boys:

laughingcat:

[quote=\"janet_lee88\"]I know there are several parents unhappy over this old boys/girls thing. However, not every parent sends their kids back to their former schools.

A former classmate of mine wanted to send her daughter back to alma mater but decided not to as she is staying too far away. Another friend didn't send her daughter to SCGS bcos she has a son...so decided to register them in co-ed school instead.

Exactly......that is still up to individual choice whether to go back to your own alma mater or not.

How about the rights of a parent to send the child to a nearby school for which they are not alumni? You can talk about rights all day long, at the end of the day, its about fairness.[/quote]It shd be about \"the best interest of the child\", then, maybe \"fairness\" (subject to different interpretation of what is fair).

Of coz, it's a given fact that all schools are \"not the same\".. as vigorously argued by many.

But there has to be some basis when formulating priority systems.. so.. the basis has to be that assuming \"all schools are the same\".

So, based on the basic principle of \"all schools are the same\", and \"the best interest of the child\", the priority system can than be formulated and debated upon. Citizenship priority can also find it's way into the system somehow..

[limlim]

3Boys:

Janet Lee's point was that pride in sending a child to an alma mater is justification for alumni priority. For something as important as P1 admission, where is the logic that 'pride' becomes the biggest factor in gaining priority admission? That ihat I am challenging.

wah..

fully agree.. +1..

[limlim]

magiccastle:

Think if this policy is still available, many grad mothers will rush to have more babies, :please: :imcool:

I seriously doubt priority admission for P1 would be a significant factor, if any impact at all, to the mother's decision to procreate.....

it can only be a bonus, not a motivating factor.

First they decide whether to hv a child..

then, they ponder which primary school to send them..

not the other way round..

A FULLY paid education might have significant influence.. but definitely not priority admission into the P school.

[limlim]

JonC:

@Daddy D


Agreed with you about \"who has the right and who has not\".

Can I make noise even thou I don't have the right to....? :evil: :evil:

[janet88]

I don’t think I am the only one who propose that Phase 2A should stay.

[limlim]

magiccastle:

Since all schools are the same , then the GEP classes should be conducted at the normal neighborhood(nn) schools and not at the premium popular(pp) schools. The nn school with the GEP class cohort will be able to produce top students with Stellar PSLE results. Then we can compare the school results of those pp schools with those nn schools but with GEP .

:goodpost:

[Tokidoki]

janet_lee88:

I don't think I am the only one who propose that Phase 2A should stay.

I definitely support Phase 2A to stay too...those whom dun belong to this phase will not understand the bond we feel with our school. Hope MOE will put more emphasis for SG Citizens.

[limlim]

magiccastle:

:hugs: Parents under 2b n 2c phrases will advocate to reduce the allotment for 2a phrase. . But once your children got in to the schools , you will want to protect the right to 2a phrase. , u will not want this phrase to be phrased out.!! It benefits generations to come.

so those of us whose kids already in the school shd be promoting 2A instead.. hmm....

maybe I shd change my stance... :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

[tankee]

doodbug:

Under this proposed scheme, for the popular schools, I think alumni who live >2km will have no chance of entering the school, even if they volunteer.

perhaps if the school is very popular.

but if the home is indeed > 2km away from the school, wouldn't it be better for the child's sake to choose another school that is much closer to home?