MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[Oppsgal]

jedamum:

what type of jobs parent volunteers are assigned to do to clock pv hours are immaterial if the ultimate objective is Phase2B priority (priority, not guarantee). so why the need to dig up and comment what type of jobs they will be requested to do? parents not happy,don't pv la. but i reckon most of the time, the main grouses came from the pv selection, not the nature of the pv jobs itself. by saying that such are 'meaningless', are we not saying that teachers who do


•Contributing to National Wushu Championship
•Traffic warden, assist in administrative work in the office
•Putting on make-up for cheerleaders, ferrying kids in between CCAs
•Escorting kids to the toilet
•Chaperons for excursions
•Buying groceries for parties
•Making sure kids don’t log on to Facebook during computer class
•Canteen duty
•Unpacking boxes, stacking, labelling of library books
•Manning game stalls
•Worst of all, acting in ridiculous skits

are all wasting their time? maybe that's why teachers are moody and don't teach as effectively these days?

i will gladly pv for the sch that is less than 500m from my place with a shot at getting a better priority in an earlier phase and wash their fish tanks if only they have fish tanks for me to wash. even if they have fish tanks, who is to decide which parent is a better fish tank washer?

Is it included in teacher's jobscope? If it is then they do. Parents are not paid to do such job. No pay why do, yet no guarantee to placing kids in?

For me, I won't even want to do PVs, unless no choice.

[LOLMum]

primary school are not independent schools.

[Oppsgal]

limlim:

phtthp:

what is the definition of a Volunteer ?


refer dictionary:-
A volunteer is a person who voluntarily offers himself or herself for a service or undertaking willingly, without pay, without any hidden intention nor motive to receive any benefit in return.

Yeah.. those pple shd undergo the first lesson.. definition of a volunteer.. or tested on it while at the interview for PV..

All I want to say is.. they HAD a choice.. Nobody forced them..

Say, you earn $1k/mth.. you wanna buy a condo.. it is your choice.. Nobody force you.. don't buy already say condo too exp.. cannot pay installment etc..

Just bcoz you cannot afford you want to ban the sale of condos?

Same thing for PVs.. Other want to do it, it is their choice.. why make so much noise.. Just bcoz they cannot afford the time they want to deprive others of a better chance at the ballot/admission?

Or \"volunteer\" already then complain when cannot get it? They HAD a choice.. they can choose not to do it.. why complain..

On the other hand.. one possibility maybe the PV not take place at 2B but at 2C with more ballot slips.. Give them some advantage.. but not too much priority..

As for 2A, for those within 1km maybe ok to retain.. other than that, it shd be removed.. No practical benefit for priority if they stay so far.. Maybe not 1km.. but maybe 2km?.. but it shd be tied to distance/proximity so as to benefit the child..


PS: I quote your post bcoz it contains definition of volunteer.. not directly the reply at you.......

Think if they swap the phrase 2B become 2C and 2C to be 2B is good.

But then makes less sense to do PVs?

[Lizzie]

phtthp:

many of those under 2A will be greatly affected!


those with siblings depend on the elder child enter P1 2013, 2014 or P1 2015 - to bring in their younger siblings into same school, are greatly hit.

if their elder child can't go in because of changes to 2A, the younger sibling also cannot enter the same school too.

all those entering P1 2014, 2015 ... better start planning alternative backup plans, if hit by 2A changes.

property and rental will sure go up like crazy, around the schools ! :siao:

can anyone recall -
once MOE announce start consider something, how long did they take to implement & swing the plan into action ? eg: PV plan last time ?

They should further distinguish rental and owner occupied. I know of too many cases who have rented to get the first born in and once obtained a place, move away even before P1 starts!. Therefore to ensure fairer treatment and enforce the logic of distance based allocation, under phase 2 for siblings priority (esp those whose first born got in the first place via distance based phase 2C), admission process should ensure that the distance based treatment is equally enforced for subsequent siblings entry .Checks should be made that applicants are still staying within the vicinity by the time the 2nd child applies . This will ensure no abuse of renting and root out \"speculative\" stayers who do not intend to stay during the duration of the primary school education. No prejudice against renters but at the very least, if application is made under phase 2 for siblings priority (refering to elder child who got in because of renting within 1km of phase 2C), applicants should still be staying (or renting) within the vicinty at least until primary education is completed.

[Lizzie]

In all cases of fairness and uphold meritocracy they should throw out all the categories of phases and just allocate students to schools near their homes.


In this case of distance based allocation, there would be a need to tighten policies of renters who are just short term stayers . All else being equal, rooting out short-term stayers, students who live 1 km, 2 km, 3km , 4km might even stand a chance to go to a school nearest to their homes and get in purely based on this merit and not some connections to who and who or so and so.

[Lizzie]

Lizzie:

In all cases of fairness and uphold meritocracy they should throw out all the categories of phases and just allocate students to schools near their homes.


In this case of distance based allocation, there would be a need to tighten policies of renters who are just short term stayers . All else being equal, rooting out short-term stayers, students who live 1 km, 2 km, 3km , 4km might even stand a chance to go to a school nearest to their homes and get in purely based on this merit and not some connections to who and who or so and so.

Administratively, it would be easier for all stakeholders,to allocate students based on distance. It also meets the objective of allowing young children to travel shorter distance and not tax them physically.

Positive spilllovers to the wider community and for the greater benefit to everyone on an economic basis, would be less accidents and cars on the road ,those those peak hour traffic jams from parents ferrying their kids to school (really cannot imagine the havoc on the roads once all schools turn single session soon).

If there is a need to stream students eventually to suit their needs, talents, or abilities (after all, how can one know where ones strengths lie in that very tender young age of 7 years old and to capture the talent earlier without having to wait until PSLE) would be to leverage on the primary 3 streaming exercise. Students can then enrol in the desired school based on the performance in the GEP (or what ever national examination there is) and stream to the targeted /specific schools where resources are tailored and customized to meet such needs.

[CactusInDesert]

Lizzie:

In all cases of fairness and uphold meritocracy they should throw out all the categories of phases and just allocate students to schools near their homes.


In this case of distance based allocation, there would be a need to tighten policies of renters who are just short term stayers . All else being equal, rooting out short-term stayers, students who live 1 km, 2 km, 3km , 4km might even stand a chance to go to a school nearest to their homes and get in purely based on this merit and not some connections to who and who or so and so.

So this is the most fair system? All who can afford to stay ard the popular schools should be allowed to enter the schools. Those who are poorer in financial term should always be excluded from these popular schools?

[limlim]

Lizzie:

In all cases of fairness and uphold meritocracy they should throw out all the categories of phases and just allocate students to schools near their homes.

I feel that a priority system works fine instead of just allocate the kids to nearby school..

Alumni, PVs, clans whatever.. shd have a chance even if they stay far away. It's their choice.. low priority is ok but don't rule them out completely.

I feel that it is not nice to rule out those far away completely.

But more priority shd be given to those nearby.

[Imsoobusy]

CactusInDesert:

Lizzie:

In all cases of fairness and uphold meritocracy they should throw out all the categories of phases and just allocate students to schools near their homes.


In this case of distance based allocation, there would be a need to tighten policies of renters who are just short term stayers . All else being equal, rooting out short-term stayers, students who live 1 km, 2 km, 3km , 4km might even stand a chance to go to a school nearest to their homes and get in purely based on this merit and not some connections to who and who or so and so.

So this is the most fair system? All who can afford to stay ard the popular schools should be allowed to enter the schools. Those who are poorer in financial term should always be excluded from these popular schools?

Not all who stay around good school are rich people. I am staying between 2 good school becos my parents have been staying here for more then 30 years. I don't have extra to buy a new flat and I am worried that my boy cannot get into the nearest sch and will need extra cost for transport.
So is not always the rich will get into good sch. Those staying at small hdb around good sch are the one whom r more worried. Not all good sch are at expensive area or whoever stay there must be rich.

[CactusInDesert]

Imsoobusy:

Not all who stay around good school are rich people. I am staying between 2 good school becos my parents have been staying here for more then 30 years. I don't have extra to buy a new flat and I am worried that my boy cannot get into the nearest sch and will need extra cost for transport.
So is not always the rich will get into good sch. Those staying at small hdb around good sch are the one whom r more worried. Not all good sch are at expensive area or whoever stay there must be rich.

I see, it is fair because you are staying near two good schools.