MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[blueblue]

I do agree that phase 1 should stay but it can be tweaked to such that only siblings of current students from P1-P5 are allowed to apply…it does not make sense to include P6 coz then they would be in sec sch by then…

[Lizzie]

tankee:

Lizzie:

Yes it's possible to move within days between the phase 2B and phase 2C. In 2010, a friend could not get her daughter to SNGS under phase 2B, sold her house (seems like turnaround for her condo is quite freq since its 1km within SNGS) and rented a place at BKT within 1 KM and got her daughter into RGPS under phase 2C without a breeze. Apparently, RGPS has lower density of residence (in terms of condos etc) , therefore, it's much easier to get in.


On the other hand, have a another friend who rented a place within 1 km of SNGS and moved out within days of getting a place there under phase 2C. So, at the end of the day, it's really luck of the draw.

not necessary to physically move within that few days between 2B & 2C. Just need to change the address on the NRIC.

however, we should never intentionally try to workaround the system. If we do and when we are caught, our child will be transfered out of the school and we may be publicly shamed (in the news). And false declaration of home address (to change in NRIC) is an offence chargable in court of law.

The recently reported MOE's move to relook into P1 registration is certainly laudable. I personally wish that they will tighten and relook into the process of enrollment in phase 1 where siblings get priority into the school especially when the first sibling got thru due to distance base under phase 2C. This is because there are just too many cases of people \"investing\" too much in the first born by renting near popular schools to increase chances of getting them in and then move away thereafter. Many I know, move away even before actual P1 starts once they manage to get a place for their first born, hence ensuring the future of the next generation. MOE should be more discerning to only allow siblings of first born (enrolled through phase 2C) who are STILL staying in the area. This will be fairer to genuine home owners who are still staying around the area and also fairer to all whether one can or cannot afford to rent around the area. This will also ensure the objective of distance based allocation is met i.e children should attend schools near home and not a phase that is abused by people. Anyway, I am saying this because I have managed to get my firstborn in based on the merit of owning a house near a popular school and will be staying vested at least until my 2nd one goes in. I have personally faced the stress on balloting even within 1 km under phase 2 C . By ensuring the tightening process of phase 1, we will actually \"spare\" the anxiety of potential parents who are thinking of renting a place (purely temporary occupants thereby competing with genuine home owners).

[limlim]

nlimm:

This is better then giving most seats to some phase 1 kids whose elder bro/sis got in using fake address( thru rental/relative/grandparent/Frds)

in that case the system shd be tweaked to address those cases rather than blanket block all sibling's priority.

for those using fake address, I agree that it should be dealt with.. maybe removing the priority for those fake cases.

[limlim]

nlimm:

Pardon me if I sound harsh haha as I am quite a direct pax.
Like what I replied. If u solely talk abt practical sense of view, could I ask u if ur kid is currently in a pri sch that's nearest to your home? If yes I have no comment but my 6 th sense tells me it's no.Then it be practical for u to just sign up ur children to the nearest sch ( even if now ur elder is in another sch). Base on mathematical calculation, u will save alot more change 2 sets of uniforms, some unused exercise BK n reused texts compared to the raising petrol price /bus fare
P/s: Note I'm not directing on u now just using u as an example:)

If I may reply to this if you're not directing only at vicki..

My kids is in a school within 1km. And I'm also glad they're in the same 'house\" then they use the same colour PE T-shirt

I only bought 2 sets for the older kid.. and 2 set for the younger. Then, as the older gets bigger can buy new sets while the younger use the older's uniform..

And. bcoz it is only 2 bus stops away.. I train them to take public transport coz cheaper then sch bus plus sch bus not avail for CCAs etc.. And they'll walk if it is good weather..

Makes practical sense? Tons of it..

[limlim]

blueblue:

I do agree that phase 1 should stay but it can be tweaked to such that only siblings of current students from P1-P5 are allowed to apply..it does not make sense to include P6 coz then they would be in sec sch by then..

But the sch uniform most likely wouldn't expire....

Plus, if nearby sch, naturally the parents wants the younger kids to get in too.. for those faraway one.. I hv no comments whether Phase 1 shd remain for them..

[mum_sugoku]

phankao:

mum_sugoku:

[quote=\"nlimm\"]
Same here don't comprehend this part.
From what I see , the best way for all top schools with overwhelming applicants to have all kids go through assessments( be even more stressful for parents ) but I will rather do so which is the fairest way then to argue here which phase shd go which phased shd combine. As personally I feel that phase 1 is usually the Phase that take up mOst seats so they shd set limit to this too

Am I right to assume that you have only 1 child?

I notice that the schools that have most seats taken up at Phase 1 are Co-Ed schools. Single-gender schools won't have quite much of that trend.[/quote]Agree. I guess it's because parents with kids of different gender (ie those with >1 kid) would prefer to put their kids in the same school for convenient reason. Which means they could only pick co-ed schools instead of single-gender ones.

[vicki]

limlim:

nlimm:

This is better then giving most seats to some phase 1 kids whose elder bro/sis got in using fake address( thru rental/relative/grandparent/Frds)

in that case the system shd be tweaked to address those cases rather than blanket block all sibling's priority.

for those using fake address, I agree that it should be dealt with.. maybe removing the priority for those fake cases.

If I rem corretly, fake address is a jailable offence. Hence, should call mata if any such cases are known.

[mum_sugoku]

nlimm:

mum_sugoku:

[quote=\"nlimm\"]
Same here don't comprehend this part.
From what I see , the best way for all top schools with overwhelming applicants to have all kids go through assessments( be even more stressful for parents ) but I will rather do so which is the fairest way then to argue here which phase shd go which phased shd combine. As personally I feel that phase 1 is usually the Phase that take up mOst seats so they shd set limit to this too

Am I right to assume that you have only 1 child?

Wrong assumption.
I just feel that this is a better & fairest way to improve the students standard of the school & retain its ranking . At the same time it's also better for those kids who can't meet the required standard not to undergo stress/phycho issue. I have no guarantee that mine able to pass but if fail at least I know that mine did not meet their standard to join them.This is better then giving most seats to some phase 1 kids whose elder bro/sis got in using fake address( thru rental/relative/grandparent/Frds)[/quote]I understand that phase 1 is the only phase which applicants are assured of a place in school, whereas for the rest, applicants are subjected to balloting should the number registered exceed the quota set for respective phases.

Since you have more than 1 child, what would you do if your younger child fails to ballot successfully for a place under your proposed combined 1/2A phase even though your elder child is already studying there?

As for students registering using fake address, I believe you are aware that should schools find out that parents had registered using fake address, they could request the child to transfer out of the school with immediate effect?

[IDad]

mum_sugoku:

nlimm:

[quote=\"mum_sugoku\"]

Am I right to assume that you have only 1 child?

Wrong assumption.
I just feel that this is a better & fairest way to improve the students standard of the school & retain its ranking . At the same time it's also better for those kids who can't meet the required standard not to undergo stress/phycho issue. I have no guarantee that mine able to pass but if fail at least I know that mine did not meet their standard to join them.This is better then giving most seats to some phase 1 kids whose elder bro/sis got in using fake address( thru rental/relative/grandparent/Frds)

I understand that phase 1 is the only phase which applicants are assured of a place in school, whereas for the rest, applicants are subjected to balloting should the number registered exceed the quota set for respective phases.

Since you have more than 1 child, what would you do if your younger child fails to ballot successfully for a place under your proposed combined 1/2A phase even though your elder child is already studying there?

As for students registering using fake address, I believe you are aware that should schools find out that parents had registered using fake address, they could request the child to transfer out of the school (with immediate effect)?[/quote]I think it's not 'request' only, they will mandate the child transfer out of the school and even report to police if they wish to. Dun play play...

[IDad]

vicki:

nlimm:

Pardon me if I sound harsh haha as I am quite a direct pax.
Like what I replied. If u solely talk abt practical sense of view, could I ask u if ur kid is currently in a pri sch that's nearest to your home? If yes I have no comment but my 6 th sense tells me it's no.Then it be practical for u to just sign up ur children to the nearest sch ( even if now ur elder is in another sch). Base on mathematical calculation, u will save alot more change 2 sets of uniforms, some unused exercise BK n reused texts compared to the raising petrol price /bus fare
P/s: Note I'm not directing on u now just using u as an example:)

Its ok - i can take frankness n harshness - and here i go again too - albeit in a more straightforward tone. Hope you dont take it to heart.

I am fine taking myself as a example so the rest of this reply will be as such.

Firstly, What do you want to debate abt? Cost of sending kids to schools that are more than >2km OR limitation of spaces for p1 and/ or p2a.

You are currently debating oranges n apples now - 2 different issues and fruits - so obviously it wont make sense.

Using your above example:-

So what if i send my kid to a nearby school?

Based on your limitation of p1 suggestion - i still might end up with different schools for each kid isnt it? Then those extra cost that i mentioned WILL still be incurred wont it?

Worst - what happens if their ccas all clash on the same day? I would have to employ 3 maids to be stationed at different schools to pick each kid up?

Sorry - so what is your point in relation to limitaion of p1 and savings? Isnt it absoluately no savings at all??

Using your mathematical example: whatever schools i go to (starting base) - as long as subsequent kids dont end up in the same schools - it will always be an increase of cost... unless you tell me - the govt compensates me for the differential cost and also non-financial cost (logistical nightmare) for ending up in different schools - then fine - no 'loss' to me.

From our exchanages, you seem to come from a popular 2a bloodline school and hence is desperate to keep this 'benefit' within the family - understand your anxiety - but pls - take a step back and come down from the ivory tower abit - does this 'elitist' and 'bloodline' attidude make sense in this current SG context?

Btw - as i said - i have bloodline just as much as you do, only that i didnt use it cos i dont have a dd at the moment. Main difference between us - i guess i am willing to 'forego' this bloodline alittle (note: i said limit NOT completely eradicate) for something that makes more sense in current registration context.

Im wondering - maybe after your first kid get in via 2a liao then you might be able to appreciate why some of us feel that limiting p1 is a senseless suggestion....

Cheers...

Very :goodpost: