MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[mrswongtuition]

The danger in factoring distance for almost all phases:

Property prices will go out of control.
Then, even if the catchment area has many HDB flats, there will be a ‘divide’ due to affordability.

I think it has to be carefully balanced.

As mentioned earlier, no solution will make everyone satisfied.
MOE not only has to weigh the interest of the students, they have to consider the convenience of the parents and ultimately, the impact on Singapore as a whole.

I’m in favour of revamping the system, but they should focus on improving the registration process first.
Change of criterion - to be settled after they get the registration process online and convenient for all parents.

[dorisp]

limlim:

laughingcat:

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?

And with such low population density (since no HDB), you are afraid that the vacancies will be be fully taken up by those <2km and left nothing for alumni far far away?

Wah! This is very direct but unfortunately very straight to the point......

[dorisp]

limlim:

mum_sugoku:

Actually priority is still given by distance. Except for phase 1, quotas are set for other phases - including phase 2A. If the number of applicants exceed the places allotted for that phase, those who live within 1Km of the school would have priority over those who live further away (See link below).

http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/admissions/primary-one-registration/allocation/

It shd have been the other way, distance, then Alumni, not like what it is now.

First, distance to qualify for the phase, then, priority for alumni or PV, clan, grassroots.. whatever..

This is certainly a good point and fair view coming from the \"head\".

[dorisp]

phtthp:

let's invite all ministers of Parliament to contribute to this forum, esp.those stay > 2km.

let's hear your view.

esp. Ministers (current, ex, retired) who are alumni from Nanyang family, ACS Barker, ACS Junior, Rosyth, Henry Park, Catholic High, Nan Hua, Tao Nan, St Hilda, RGPS, SCGS, etc. or any Minister from SAP schools, Catholic family, Methodist family, Anglican family, Buddhist family, Hokkien Clan Huay Kuan related family, other religious group family, other family, etc.

What is the underlying message?

[concern2]

IDad:

laughingcat:

[quote=\"concern2\"]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?

Then as what I have quote earlier.....schools like SCGS and ACS, they don't have HDB flats within 2km.

So do you want to see social divides (Rich and Poor) in such schools?

I'm sorry to burst your bubble dear, there are HDB flats with 2km of SCGS, ACSP and ACSJ. They are at Cambridge, Owen Road, Ah Hood areas. For ACSJ, within 1km also have, Blk 661, 662 Tekka Market. So your argument doesn't hold.[/quote]What, what bubbles are you talking about? YOU BURST MY CASTLE! (I was building castles in the air )

I guess in those areas, traffic conditions not much difference, holidays or no holidays.

[Lyddon]

mrswongtuition:

The danger in factoring distance for almost all phases:

Property prices will go out of control.
Then, even if the catchment area has many HDB flats, there will be a 'divide' due to affordability.

I think it has to be carefully balanced.

As mentioned earlier, no solution will make everyone satisfied.
MOE not only has to weigh the interest of the students, they have to consider the convenience of the parents and ultimately, the impact on Singapore as a whole.

I'm in favour of revamping the system, but they should focus on improving the registration process first.
Change of criterion - to be settled after they get the registration process online and convenient for all parents.

Increase in property prices will also have other consequences.

If priority by distance, property prices within the 2km range will escalating further. Over time, this will lead to those schools having only students whose parents can afford it (high property COVs and high valuations) and less popular schools with students whose parents can't. Do we really want to divide public schools by those who have it vs those who don't?

[Power Puff]

I'm sure a few decision makers must be reading KSP' posts right now. And hopefully understand and take positive steps (NOT 'WE HEAR YOU' BUT TOO BAD, WE'HAVE DECIDED!!!!!) to address parents' concerns and frustrations. That so many parents are debating their cause is commendable. It goes to show how Singaporeans love their precious few children and want the very best for them, just like how we've been nurtured from young to excel in everything we do. The Govt must be very proud of us.


Anyway, before I get slammed for wasting your time, we can have a compromise. Abolish Phase 2A2 altogether!!! Only parents who are old pupils of the school AND are alumni members can get priority, after the Siblings phase. This should soothe some of the naysayers regarding alumni 'connection'. Truth be told, I detest the word 'connection'. It is derogatory and makes light of the importance of alumni and tradition. All the rest who are under GRLs, PVs, community leaders, what-nots, or church and clan memberships to ballot and given priority based on distance or number of children. Then parents can 'fight' on equal grounds. What do you think?

[Nebbermind]

Power Puff:

Only parents who are old pupils of the school AND are alumni members can get priority, after the Siblings phase.

Not sure all schools have alumni associations...but I guess not.

[Power Puff]

OOps sorry…I meant abolish Phase 2B altogether - too confusing and unfair in the selection of PVs et al. I feel so sorry for those parents who choose to become PVs, spend so much time and effort, only to get balloted out. It would be good that MOE mandates that all schools stop this unhealthy practice. Alumni members can then have a chance to become ‘active’ and be part of the Parents Support Groups. At least they provide ‘free labour’ and expertise happily and at the same time get to build strong rapport with the staff and students, which can only be better for the school.


Parents who are staff of the school should also be placed in the same phase with ‘Siblings’ for practical reasons. Many school staff start work very early at 6ish am, before the pupils arrive at school. It would be a mad mad rush for them to have to travel up and down just to get their kids to and from school.

[Power Puff]

Reading the distance factor in the registration priority has been giving me good ideas on how to plan for my early retirement :evil: