MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni
-
Lyddon:
:goodpost:
Kudos to that!
And what about the many medals, accolades and non-financial contributions that ex-students has given to their alma mater - that made the school what it is today? ... that made the school over-subscribed.
Remove Phase 2A, and it sets a precedence that :
1) alumni contributions are of no significance and unappreciated.
2) no reason to develop a sense of \"school-spirit\" and encourage contributions from the current cohort of students. (since it will not be recognised and appreciated, anyway).
Yes, Phase 2A should stay. -
Power Puff:
*Clicks LIKE*For parents who are unhappy about sleeping alumni members, please remember these pupils have directly contributed to their school while they were studying there. You do not and cannot expect all alumni members to actively contribute to that same primary school for the rest of their lives as they also attend sec, post sec and uni, find jobs, get married, have children and other commitments? Choosing to send their kids back to the very same primary school is also another form of contribution. And it is true that despite the hiccups here and there, our public transportation system has improved. In the 70s and 80s, we didn't have MRT, LRT. We had to rely on public bus and for the more fortunate ones, school bus or private transport.
We should focus more on how to make the P1 registration system Phases 2B and 2C better by giving more priority according to distance, while leaving the siblings and alumni phases with the same top priority. Pupils of ex-siblings should be in the same phase as pupils of current siblings, in line with govt's efforts at encouraging procreation. To a smaller extent, MOE will also need to address the issue of priority given to SG citizens vs PRs. There's just so much resentment about Singaporeans being made to feel 2nd class citizens, as witnessed during the elections. Even if the citizenship priority is not addressed, then giving priority based on distance itself will be a good change and welcomed by many parents who have more than 1 child.
Maybe they should have another system: Those with more siblings get priority (please don't shoot me).
It's just a random thought that might help increase population numbers. -
Well, it is not about 2A1 vs 2A2 or 2A (as a whole) vs 2B or 2C.
IMHO, we could keep the alumni connection (2A1+2A2), we can also keep PV, clan and GRL (2B) as it is a system run by willing parties knowing the odds.
The issue seemed to be those 2A (as a whole) staying >2km or far away.
The numbers of registration in 2A are more and more alarming, so it may mean there are more and more of those 2A >2km. Each 2A >2km taken will be at the expense of one 2C <1km.
Hence the issue is "is there too much priority given to alumni" so much so that it is unconditional leading to inefficiency and totally make the original notion whereby priority by distance a mockery. -
Imsoobusy:
Not everyone is that lucky, I can cycle to bring my boy to sch but there's not way I can ask my mum of 70 age to fetch and cycle my boy home everyday as I am working daily from 7am to 7pm and sometimes ot. Need to spare a thot for those really in need of money.[/quote]Then ask for subsidy and not twitching the policy for such small mass.
I did not come from a well off family. My father fetch me to school (abt 3km) on his rusty old ah pek bike. When i got older, I got my own secondhand bike. cycling time to school 25mins. Go figure how much is a budget 2ndhand bike now.Lyddon:
[quote=\"Imsoobusy\"]
How about the cost of transport, ESP to those that struggle mthly. Is additional cost and school bus are not cheap these days. Unless gov is giving those lower income families free transport for the kids, or special package.
On the other hand, it will be social inequality if everyone asking for subsidy like it is a must. If one has hands and feet, fight for your survival. -
vicki:
*wondering out loud*
Wonder perhaps if the govt build more primary schools near catchment areas which has alot of houses/ flats but insufficient spaces (I can only thk Jurong area offhand now) - would it solve the prob of no school 'near' my hse'?
Or maybe it will not solve anythg cos 'i still can't get into the 'popular' school near my hse'....
Based on the current system, it is the word 'popular' that matters. Take for example, if there are 2 schools, one popular, one isn't, both within the same distance from your house, which one would you choose? Try your luck at balloting in the Popular one first? Or avoid the ballots and apply for a guaranteed seat into the less popular school?
In any case, the govt has been building many primary schools 'near catchment areas which has alot of houses/ flats but insufficient spaces', and that has resulted in a lot of TRAFFIC PROBLEMS. But it really isn't MOE or the govt's problem. They have become our problem, and problems to the residents living around such schools. But
-
buds:
Distance is a BIG DEAL to me because it'll mean I have to lug two children n a baby during confinement (back then).. rain or shine.. via public transport, if I cannot get into a neighborhood school just behind my residence or if transport arrangements doesn't work out for a school slightly further away. Worse if need to chg two buses.. and that said haven't factor in if two children are in different sessions and have CCA commitment before/after school.. :faint:
Excellent point.
Extra priority to the child that has more siblings.
That would certainly increase our birth rate! -
dorisp:
You still do not get the point. If almuni should stay, then why fault those who stayed more than 2km? Why fault those who contributed to the school?Well, it is not about 2A1 vs 2A2 or 2A (as a whole) vs 2B or 2C.
IMHO, we could keep the alumni connection (2A1+2A2), we can also keep PV, clan and GRL (2B) as it is a system run by willing parties knowing the odds.
The issue seemed to be those 2A (as a whole) staying >2km or far away.
The numbers of registration in 2A are more and more alarming, so it may mean there are more and more of those 2A >2km. Each 2A >2km taken will be at the expense of one 2C <1km.
Hence the issue is \"is there too much priority given to alumni\" so much so that it is unconditional leading to inefficiency and totally make the original notion whereby priority by distance a mockery.
If one is concern about the phase 2C vacancy, then take away the controversial PV, GRL and clan. Then you have it all the vacancy you ask for.
Take a look at SCGS and ACS......do you see HDB within 2km????? The answer is NO. Are we creating social divides here by looking at distance only? -
Lyddon:
That is why give priority to those family members who have 3 children and more. That is inline with SGp procreation policy. :evil:buds:
Distance is a BIG DEAL to me because it'll mean I have to lug two children n a baby during confinement (back then).. rain or shine.. via public transport, if I cannot get into a neighborhood school just behind my residence or if transport arrangements doesn't work out for a school slightly further away. Worse if need to chg two buses.. and that said haven't factor in if two children are in different sessions and have CCA commitment before/after school.. :faint:
Excellent point.
Extra priority to the child that has more siblings.
That would certainly increase our birth rate! -
Hey, people, has it occurred to you that if distance become priority, and that being the key determining factor to school selection, then there will be LESS TRAFFIC on the roads - less school buses, no need to drive children to school (walk/cycle can do), less traffic cramped outside school compounds (less hazards to children), we save, govt also save, no need to buy so many buses, no need to squeeze in crowded buses and MRTs to get to school? I mean - like the roads are so much quieter during school holidays!!! Doesn't it mean something to you?
-
dorisp:
Err... please correct me if I am wrong. :scratchhead: (Don't flame me, okay).Well, it is not about 2A1 vs 2A2 or 2A (as a whole) vs 2B or 2C.
IMHO, we could keep the alumni connection (2A1+2A2), we can also keep PV, clan and GRL (2B) as it is a system run by willing parties knowing the odds.
The issue seemed to be those 2A (as a whole) staying >2km or far away.
The numbers of registration in 2A are more and more alarming, so it may mean there are more and more of those 2A >2km. Each 2A >2km taken will be at the expense of one 2C <1km.
Hence the issue is \"is there too much priority given to alumni\" so much so that it is unconditional leading to inefficiency and totally make the original notion whereby priority by distance a mockery.
I have always thought that the original notion (as you call it) is not priority by distance, it is alumni more important than distance. Perhaps the question you are asking is should the original intent - where alumni is more important than other 2B connections, and 2B connections more important than distance - be changed?
:siam:
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better š
Register Login